shaky
0
You have to be fair when hiring and firing, that is why employment law exists. All the union will do is give you advice and legal backing if you have been treated unlawfully.
PNE Online
Welcome to PNE-Online.
Why not register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
You can also join up as a forum Patron to help support in the running costs of the forum.
Next Election!
- Thread starter kpc
- Start date
You have to be fair when hiring and firing, that is why employment law exists. All the union will do is give you advice and legal backing if you have been treated unlawfully.
J
jaymo
Because people deserve rights in the workplace. You should be able to hire and fire who you want, but for valid reasons, in no way should you be able to fire who you want for whatever reason you want. At least not IMO.
Like I said, if you offered me 2 exact same jobs, one with a union presence and one without, id take the union one everytime, becasue my experience is those employers treat you like a human being, whether its forced or not. The same isnt true in my experiences of non union workplaces, where they are out to screw you for everything they can.
At the end of the day, an employee-employer relaitonship is supposed to be mutually beneficial.
P
PTID
Do the Police Force have a union, does anyone know?
(Before you start Shakes, there's a genuine reason I'm asking...you might know where I'm going...)
(Before you start Shakes, there's a genuine reason I'm asking...you might know where I'm going...)
ACAS will also do that for free
The Police Federation is their union.Do the Police Force have a union, does anyone know?
(Before you start Shakes, there's a genuine reason I'm asking...you might know where I'm going...)
P
PTID
Added to that, it is also not compulsory to join the union either. At our place if you don't join then they don't represent you should something go wrong etc. Granted you get the same payrise that they negotiation, but they would only step in or take up your case if you were a member.
I'm not actually in our union at the moment simply for the fact that when I joined I was a grad, and the grads had their own board of managers etc for this type of thing. I really should look into it though.
P
PTID
They have, I believe, certain limitations - for instance I don't think they are allowed to go out on strike
P
PTID
I think it is illegal for Police to strike, yeah.
Thanks for that. I was only wondering because I know someone who is challenging a dismissal at the moment. Thought he would have used said union if it existed...
Tell them to go to ACAS who will go through all aspects of the case and will help them fight their case if any emplyment law has been broken. They have a help line
J
jaymo
they do do a lot of good. ive been involved in union meetings at my last place though, and sometimes they dont do an awful lot. At times they seemed to get so lost up in what managers are doign to certain people etc. Like "oh a managers allowing x to have a chat for 5 mins but coming down on me for chatting" that kind of thing, the nitpicking, and that annoys me about it.
On the whole I would assume that the majority of workplaces with union involvement are better places to work then their non union equivalents though.
shaky
0
Yes they will, they will advise you and give you support. The Union will get you the best barristers money can buy and give you the most powerful legal backing you could get. They will also ensure your working terms and conditions are up to scratch.
I suggest you ask the guys still at Goss what has happened to their terms and conditions now that all the union people have left. How they must wish they had the union to fight their corner at this present time.
shaky
0
There is one person on this forum who's father was being cheated out of early retirement by the company he worked for, the union fought his case tooth and nail until the company backtracked and gave him what was rightfully his terms and conditions.
Firms are always on the lookout for loopholes in agreements to get out of coughing up when an employee is entitled to a handsome redundancy settlement. The same firm now says "There is no redundancy agreement" which seems strange, because there was when I was there, and it was seemingly set in stone.
Where's that pesky union when you need it?
Firms are always on the lookout for loopholes in agreements to get out of coughing up when an employee is entitled to a handsome redundancy settlement. The same firm now says "There is no redundancy agreement" which seems strange, because there was when I was there, and it was seemingly set in stone.
Where's that pesky union when you need it?
cpnend
0
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2004
- Messages
- 6,015
No, Britain does not have access to sensitive technology, (such as source code). Its something we want but has not yet been granted. So, to quote Dick Evans, the contract will turn BAE in to a company of tin bashers. It the ability to defend ouraselves is strategically important to us then F35 is a bad contract. Short term financially its a honey, always assuming anyone orders it. (Check out Rivet Joint if you want to see how the Yanks will to play it.)
F22's cost at somewhere in the region of $150 million a piece, not that the US would sell them to us. I'm not privvy to the cost of a Eurofighter but I don't believe its anywhere near that. The last (internet) estimate was $40m+ but I stand to be corrected. It was certainly once said that if an F22 took on 10 Eurofighters it would kill 9 of them before it was shot down and that that would make the Eurofighter more cost effective.
Disagree with your statement that F16 & 18's are better, assume you mean more cost effective.
Regarding it being built for a threat that no longer exists thats true. But can you tell us what threats we'll have to face from whenever Tornado goes out of service ? IED's and kalasnikov's will just be it will it? Russia is becoming more beligerant and making territorial claims in the arctic, such that Norway is requesting that NATO take more of a stance in that area. It also cuts off the gas whenever it feels like it. If we are serious about defence it has to be balanced. Cheap and simple based on tribesmen's capabilities would be attractive but short sighted.
F35's may be part of the answer but it effectiveness is still the subject of bitter debate. Stealth and no punch or punch and no stealth. Still less punch though, ie air superiority.
Not with you.
(to the original poster, bit off topic, sorry)
P
PTID
No, it is now where NEAR that much mate, you are correct.
Funny, your comment about source code...I'm currently in an argument regarding ours for EF!
