PVRs started.....
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it is an enormous grey area
Whether a legal eagle could make such a case stick would depend on three things...
- Whether there is a viable case.
- Whether your legal eagle knows his/her stuff.
- How deep your pockets are (somebodies gotta pay and you ain't getting legal aid for this)
Anything is worth a try though..if you have the money (and motivation).
If you did put a case forward, its not a good lawyer you need - its a friendly editor.
At a time when the RAF is looking to make 5000 redundancies, and having laid off 170 pilots from the trg system, they would have to have a damn good reason for spending money fighting a legal case to keep someone in.
You don't always have to win the case, just kick em where it hurts enough times and they will let go.
At a time when the RAF is looking to make 5000 redundancies, and having laid off 170 pilots from the trg system, they would have to have a damn good reason for spending money fighting a legal case to keep someone in.
You don't always have to win the case, just kick em where it hurts enough times and they will let go.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Mostly here, but often there
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ref 1000+ BA pilots....
Sod elsewhere, creates lots of opportunities within BA is more to the point!!
Coat for Jack please....
On the other hand that does create opportunities elsewhere
Coat for Jack please....
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Great Britain
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have been told that Manning are enforcing the Return of Service requirements for Rotary Aircrew to the point that guys who have made the 7 x JPA PVR mouse clicks in good faith (thinking they were good to go) have been told by Manning their application has been rejected.
This at a time of redundancy is an interesting development because I am sure we all know how cancerous disgruntled staff can be to a Stn never mind Sqn or Flt. It looks like Manning are shoring up the sinking ship and the damage limitations being executed will have a detrimental effect to an already rock bottom state of morale.
The MoD employed Civil Service Redundancies are out and not all applicants were succesfull despite 12,500 shortage of applicants for voluntary redundancy.
This at a time of redundancy is an interesting development because I am sure we all know how cancerous disgruntled staff can be to a Stn never mind Sqn or Flt. It looks like Manning are shoring up the sinking ship and the damage limitations being executed will have a detrimental effect to an already rock bottom state of morale.
The MoD employed Civil Service Redundancies are out and not all applicants were succesfull despite 12,500 shortage of applicants for voluntary redundancy.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Be interesting if someone got some legal advice into all of this. It was my understanding, although i am possibly wrong, that the Crown no longer holds immunity wrt pemployment law. Rumour i heard third hand was that a good solicitor could get you out with 3 months notice IF you have a solid job offer in place. Anyone got any details on this?
If people want to leave, then you got to let them go and find out whats the problem. Holding a 20% pay cut like a gun to all our heads is just going to (and is) creating an "interesting" atmosphere on squadrons. Many can smell the blood already.
If people want to leave, then you got to let them go and find out whats the problem. Holding a 20% pay cut like a gun to all our heads is just going to (and is) creating an "interesting" atmosphere on squadrons. Many can smell the blood already.
Last edited by VinRouge; 6th Jul 2011 at 22:06.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: ENGLAND
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
20% pay cut? Does your specialist pay include a retention factor? If you choose to leave then why receive a retention allowance?
[genuine question but you all need to be clear on what it is you are losing]
[genuine question but you all need to be clear on what it is you are losing]
Last edited by exairman; 6th Jul 2011 at 22:42. Reason: Clarification
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Puken
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ex airman, a sound point, however why continue to pay flying pay to those who have taken their option or turn down PA spine/promotion?
Surely the 'retention' aspect of Flying Pay applies to those people too? Otherwise aircrew are on different contracts without knowledge or consent?
Or are some more equal than others?
Surely the 'retention' aspect of Flying Pay applies to those people too? Otherwise aircrew are on different contracts without knowledge or consent?
Or are some more equal than others?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: with the spiders from mars
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maintenance of Morale has been discarded along with a whole load of young, keen, (possibly) less cynical pilots, the next generation of experience.
Strange when we don't seem to need new pilots that the service should choose to ring-fence those poor weather beaten buggers already in, and beat them into submission with increasingly dirty sticks. Not sure what is left after 18 month PVRs come in, perhaps we could go all Victorian and re-introduce stocks and the lash (not the Friday night one).
At least we can lay responsibility at the foot of Flight Lieutenants and Flying Officers, those who have not been through the promotion system and been identified as having potential for 2 ranks above. It would be disappointing to think that the 'future senior leadership' could show such little, and make such poor decisions, especially if they have demonstrated their competencies by running a 'bloody good Summer Ball'.
Still, it could be worse........
Strange when we don't seem to need new pilots that the service should choose to ring-fence those poor weather beaten buggers already in, and beat them into submission with increasingly dirty sticks. Not sure what is left after 18 month PVRs come in, perhaps we could go all Victorian and re-introduce stocks and the lash (not the Friday night one).
At least we can lay responsibility at the foot of Flight Lieutenants and Flying Officers, those who have not been through the promotion system and been identified as having potential for 2 ranks above. It would be disappointing to think that the 'future senior leadership' could show such little, and make such poor decisions, especially if they have demonstrated their competencies by running a 'bloody good Summer Ball'.
Still, it could be worse........
Indeed, the PVR brass bell (or ETBB?) is at H-W, analogies with the wooden portal on the outside facility during a period where the isobars are very close together are entirely appropriate.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exairman, sure, take away flying pay. But that ruling should have also included a condition that the longest they can hold you to is say 6 months. At the time the fp ruling came in, they were trying to shed people. Now people are (unsurprisingly) heading for the exits, using it as a means usury to keep in those contemplating leaving is pretty pathetic and as commented elsewhere, very damaging for everyones morale. This, i suspect is what happens when blunties fiddle with allowances whilst manning try and control retention.
All it Is going to take is one test case for someone to demonstrate the rather dubious nature that is an18 month cut in fp while you wait at mannings pleasure,and the floodgates will open. Round abouts the same time that lots of the airlines are dropping their type rating requirements.
All it Is going to take is one test case for someone to demonstrate the rather dubious nature that is an18 month cut in fp while you wait at mannings pleasure,and the floodgates will open. Round abouts the same time that lots of the airlines are dropping their type rating requirements.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
20% pay cut? Does your specialist pay include a retention factor? If you choose to leave then why receive a retention allowance?
Integrity because most contracts are based on mutual trust and the knowledge that they will not be changed willy nilly to suit the purposes of one side without the knowlege and agreement of the other. PVR is just a method of leaving, no different to any other (like coming to the end of an engagement). No problem if the rules of flying pay change...just don't do it retrospectively to people already in and serving.
Common sense because high calibre military people may be loyal but they ae not mugs. They will see straight through this and react accordingly. When someone has decided to leave, what you get out of them for their remaining time is a matter of goodwill. If you just shoved a 10 foot red hot poker up their jacksy, goodwill will be on the negative side of zero.