New comms Hub goes to Leeming
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Emptying the litter bin
Age: 65
Posts: 409
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Several miles SSW of Watford Gap
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now mentioned on the MOD website: http://www.news.mod.uk/news_headline...wsItem_id=3928
no mention about the ADGE world though!
no mention about the ADGE world though!
Does this mean bye bye to RAF Kirton in Lindsey?
Art Field,
There will be civilian jobs involved here, it is the LAW that you have to consult if you are going to move people with possible redundancy consequences.
It has b*gger all to do with the unions agreeing policy matters!
Good old BBC............
"RAF Leeming is currently home to two Tornado F3 squadrons, which are being phased out of service in about 2018"
IN fact it is home to ONE Tornado F3 squadron that is being phased out of service in 2008!
Art Field,
There will be civilian jobs involved here, it is the LAW that you have to consult if you are going to move people with possible redundancy consequences.
It has b*gger all to do with the unions agreeing policy matters!
Good old BBC............
"RAF Leeming is currently home to two Tornado F3 squadrons, which are being phased out of service in about 2018"
IN fact it is home to ONE Tornado F3 squadron that is being phased out of service in 2008!
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Several miles SSW of Watford Gap
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Art Field
Whether you agree or not, the answer is yes. I had the unfortunate experience of having to consult with the Union’s in Northern Ireland in the late 90s (a bunch of Unions that appeared to have missed the Thatcherite reforms and restrictions of the 80s). The experience can best be described as slightly worse that eating your own eye balls.
The MOD is considered the same as all Government Departments in this respect and has done for a considerable length of time (pre-dating Mr Blair’s accession).
It is comforting to note that the decision is subject to Trade Union consultation, are the services really dependent on the unions to agree policy matters now ?.
The MOD is considered the same as all Government Departments in this respect and has done for a considerable length of time (pre-dating Mr Blair’s accession).
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gotta feel for TCW in all this.
Some of those have bought houses, got kids in school's etc on the premise of Scampton.
I believe the communication on the subject from above has been lacking somewhat.
Some of those have bought houses, got kids in school's etc on the premise of Scampton.
I believe the communication on the subject from above has been lacking somewhat.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Going out on a limb, why the hell are we beholden to the trade unions? Defence is an absolute necessity for the UK, and I think it is disgraceful that we should have to "consult" with the unions over vital strategic decisions such as where our assets are based.
It is essential to mitigate the consequences of any base closures, and civvies deserve appropriate remuneration for the disruption - as do blue-suiters, although it suits the Government to forget that these decisions affect us too. But surely "consulting" trades unions is not a healthy way to make military decisions?
Just a thought.
It is essential to mitigate the consequences of any base closures, and civvies deserve appropriate remuneration for the disruption - as do blue-suiters, although it suits the Government to forget that these decisions affect us too. But surely "consulting" trades unions is not a healthy way to make military decisions?
Just a thought.
tablet_eraser,
Nobody is "beholden" to Trade Unions here, it is a simple matter of employment law.
If you are going to carry out any change which may well result in 30 or more redundancies you HAVE to enter into a 90 day period of consultation with those employees prior to those changes being implemented, that is not open to debate it is the law, pure and simple. If those employees are not represented by a Trades Union you enter into individual consultation, as most MOD employed civilians are members of a Trade Union the unions naturally get involved.
These "consultations" will involve a statement of what is intended, such as 'your job is being moved 200 miles away and if you do not want to move with it, as that constitutes constructive dismissal, there will be a redundancy package involved based around legal minimums. The terms and conditions of that redundancy package are normally what the consultatiions are about.
So, nothing to do with the Trades Unions affecting military decisions, just good old employment law.
Nobody is "beholden" to Trade Unions here, it is a simple matter of employment law.
If you are going to carry out any change which may well result in 30 or more redundancies you HAVE to enter into a 90 day period of consultation with those employees prior to those changes being implemented, that is not open to debate it is the law, pure and simple. If those employees are not represented by a Trades Union you enter into individual consultation, as most MOD employed civilians are members of a Trade Union the unions naturally get involved.
These "consultations" will involve a statement of what is intended, such as 'your job is being moved 200 miles away and if you do not want to move with it, as that constitutes constructive dismissal, there will be a redundancy package involved based around legal minimums. The terms and conditions of that redundancy package are normally what the consultatiions are about.
So, nothing to do with the Trades Unions affecting military decisions, just good old employment law.
Not being a practisioner (is that how you spell it .... its been a long day) of the law, maybe my simple brain is struggling to understand how it can be called a redundancy just because the job moves to the other end of the A1.
The jobs still exists, assuming that nobody is getting fired, how can someone be made redundant if they are given the option of moving with their job? If they don't want to commute (live in the Mess during the week as many of us have to) then to my mind, it's resignation.
So forgive me if I don't get overly concerned about people claiming to have been made redundant when all that has happened is the job has moved and they were given the opportunities to move with it and they decided not to take it.
The jobs still exists, assuming that nobody is getting fired, how can someone be made redundant if they are given the option of moving with their job? If they don't want to commute (live in the Mess during the week as many of us have to) then to my mind, it's resignation.
So forgive me if I don't get overly concerned about people claiming to have been made redundant when all that has happened is the job has moved and they were given the opportunities to move with it and they decided not to take it.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: earth
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Consulting with the Trade Unions is a requirement. Getting their agreement is not. There is a difference between consultaion and consensus. In consultation, they have the opportunity to suggest alternative ways of doing business. Take them or leave them dependant on the situation.
If we don't apply this common and reasonable aspect of employment law, then we run a dictatorial state which none of us should be willing to fight for.
If we don't apply this common and reasonable aspect of employment law, then we run a dictatorial state which none of us should be willing to fight for.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unmissable, pr00ne,
Taking the point about employment law, where does Unmissable's claim about a "dictatorial" state come into it?
Ways and means... didn't mean to put the cat among the pigeons.
Taking the point about employment law, where does Unmissable's claim about a "dictatorial" state come into it?
It is essential to mitigate the consequences of any base closures, and civvies deserve appropriate remuneration for the disruption...
I don’t think the risk of a “dictatorial state” comes into it. Most of our employment law is a watered down version of that existing in Europe, and I DO mean watered down!
If a company wishes to either close down a facility or move it to another location, and it affects 30 or more employees, then it is obliged under current employment law to enter into a 90 day consultation period with said employees. All “good” employers will extend this to smaller numbers even down to a single individual.
Melchett01,
If an employer moves a job to an area that it is outside the accepted travel to work area of the existing job, then that is deemed to be constructive dismissal. Remember that by far the majority of jobs affected by these sorts of moves do not pay at all well and the employee will very often be forced to seek alternative employment where they already live. We are not talking serving military personnel here so the commute and live in a mess is not an option.
I used to spend an awfully large amount of time introducing US based multi-nationals to these ideas, essentially alien to them as they have no such constraints in the US. I believe the UK has ended up at a decent half way house between the US hire and fire on the spot with absolutely no job security and the very strict hotch-potch of European laws, all still essentially different by nationality, France and Belgium being by far the most protective of the employee.
If a company wishes to either close down a facility or move it to another location, and it affects 30 or more employees, then it is obliged under current employment law to enter into a 90 day consultation period with said employees. All “good” employers will extend this to smaller numbers even down to a single individual.
Melchett01,
If an employer moves a job to an area that it is outside the accepted travel to work area of the existing job, then that is deemed to be constructive dismissal. Remember that by far the majority of jobs affected by these sorts of moves do not pay at all well and the employee will very often be forced to seek alternative employment where they already live. We are not talking serving military personnel here so the commute and live in a mess is not an option.
I used to spend an awfully large amount of time introducing US based multi-nationals to these ideas, essentially alien to them as they have no such constraints in the US. I believe the UK has ended up at a decent half way house between the US hire and fire on the spot with absolutely no job security and the very strict hotch-potch of European laws, all still essentially different by nationality, France and Belgium being by far the most protective of the employee.
Originally Posted by pr00ne
If a company wishes to either close down a facility or move it to another location, and it affects 30 or more employees, then it is obliged under current employment law to enter into a 90 day consultation period with said employees.
If an employer moves a job to an area that it is outside the accepted travel to work area of the existing job, then that is deemed to be constructive dismissal. Remember that by far the majority of jobs affected by these sorts of moves do not pay at all well and the employee will very often be forced to seek alternative employment where they already live. We are not talking serving military personnel here so the commute and live in a mess is not an option.
If an employer moves a job to an area that it is outside the accepted travel to work area of the existing job, then that is deemed to be constructive dismissal. Remember that by far the majority of jobs affected by these sorts of moves do not pay at all well and the employee will very often be forced to seek alternative employment where they already live. We are not talking serving military personnel here so the commute and live in a mess is not an option.
As a 'victim' of such a redundancy situation 3 years ago, I have a vague recollection of the stated distance of proposed new location being greater than a 20 mile (may have been 25 miles) radius from current location.
Nexialist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Milton Keynes
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It should also be bourne in mind that a "consultation" does not and was never intended to mean a negotiation on whether or not the change was to proceed. It is simply a mechanism to make sure that the employees are informed of what is going to happen in a timely manner, it also allows employees to bring up any suggestions about how something may be handled, and ask for support finding new jobs etc.
All in all it's a bit like the "right to express a preferance" as to which school your children attend. Yes you have the right to expres a preferance, Yes they can totally ignore your expressed preferance.
All in all it's a bit like the "right to express a preferance" as to which school your children attend. Yes you have the right to expres a preferance, Yes they can totally ignore your expressed preferance.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great News 
Will the Units from Boulmer also be going to Leeming, as a review regarding the transfer of units from Boulmer to Scampton was announced in December.
Boulmer is not mentioned, but I presume that the units from Boulmer will most likely be joining other units at Leeming and that Boulmer will still be closing???
Will the Units from Boulmer also be going to Leeming, as a review regarding the transfer of units from Boulmer to Scampton was announced in December.
Boulmer is not mentioned, but I presume that the units from Boulmer will most likely be joining other units at Leeming and that Boulmer will still be closing???
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Witney UK
Posts: 616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank-you to all those who kindly answered my somewhat tongue in cheek question re union consultation. I can accept that those threatened with redundancy are entitled to information and assistance although it would appear that some unions attempt to make more of an issue of the situation. I particularily feel for those service members who tried to get one jump ahead and had already looked or even committed to Scampton having myself been close to cash layout for a posting which was changed at the very last minute.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boulmer is still under review. My feeling is that after a £60m spend on the Stn a couple of years ago to establish it as the home of UK AD management, it would be silly to close it.
Then again, I don't operate with the twisted logic employed by beancounters...
Then again, I don't operate with the twisted logic employed by beancounters...
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As Boulmer was supposed to move to Scampton and close, I would have thought the units would now go to Leeming.
I can't see the RAF keeping Boulmer open if it can accomodate these units on one site at Leeming. Also Leeming has a runway which was one of the reasons for the move to Scampton, as these units are supposed to be increasingly expeditionary.
I could be wrong, but I think any review will announce the closure of Boulmer and a move to Leeming, in order to create the so-called centre of excellence.
I can't see the RAF keeping Boulmer open if it can accomodate these units on one site at Leeming. Also Leeming has a runway which was one of the reasons for the move to Scampton, as these units are supposed to be increasingly expeditionary.
I could be wrong, but I think any review will announce the closure of Boulmer and a move to Leeming, in order to create the so-called centre of excellence.