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

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

House of Commons - Armed Forces - Written Evidence

[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 ....

[vfr into cloud]

wrathmonk

get ya own thread

or RTFQ

ya muppet

Vfr

[The Old Fat One]

Since you ask.

well know for their military expertise...

Introduction - Wilkin Chapman Grange Solicitors

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

[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.