LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With QuoteNot to mention the rest of the NationOriginally Posted by tankie
This is an absolute bloody disgrace , the crass bastards do not deserve soldiers , granted they were nearing the end of their service but this is wrong ,I hope they find who sent the emails and shove his/hers computer's up their impersonal soddin arse's , BASTARDS .
The Army has apologised for "causing distress" after 38 soldiers - including one serving in Afghanistan - were sacked by email.
News of the blunder comes a day after it was revealed a quarter of the RAF's trainee pilots will not get a job in the service due to Government spending cuts.
The warrant officers who were dismissed by email were told it was because the Army also needed to make savings.
The message to the men read: "I write to notify you that with regret, I must issue you with 12 months' Notice of Termination.
"As I'm sure you are aware the Army has to make significant cutbacks and we... are expected to play our part in reductions."
The 38 warrant officers - the highest non-commissioned rank - all have at least 20 years' service and continue in the Army on a rolling contract.
However, The Sun claimed one of the veteran soldiers received the bad news while on the front line in Afghanistan.
Armed Forces Minister Nick Harvey told Sky News: "This certainly should not have happened.
"We will need to get to the bottom of what on earth has gone wrong but on behalf of the Ministry of Defence and the Army, I would apologise to these individuals."
The MoD has been quick to point out this was not a mistake on the part of civil servants or ministers - but a mistake in terms of "sequencing" made by the Army.
The sacked soldiers should have been told by their commanding officer about the decision before receiving it in writing.
In this case, that sequence of events did not happen.
Army sources said the individual responsible for the gaffe would be spoken to by the chain of command about the need to be sensitive in these matters.
Defence Secretary Liam Fox said he was "furious" over the email.
He has demanded an explanation of how it happened, saying this was "no way" to treat Armed Forces personnel.
"I am furious that such a situation should occur," he said in a statement issued by the MoD.
"I want to know how this was allowed to happen and what measures will be put in place to prevent this from happening again."
When their contracts are up in a year's time, the servicemen will get their full re-settlement package and thousands of pounds towards future training.
Despite this, shadow defence secretary Jim Murphy said getting fired in such a way was "cold-hearted".
"Sacking anybody by email is wrong, but sacking our Armed Forces in this way is absolutely unforgivable," he said.
"The whole Armed Forces community will be shocked and appalled.
"We can't halt every redundancy in the Armed Forces, but this was a cold-hearted act towards those whose courage and commitment to our country is unsurpassed.
"They must be treated with the utmost respect.
"Ministers must explain why and how this happened and ensure it is never, ever repeated.
TANKIE.
Not to mention the rest of the Nation
Absolutely disgusting, the worlds gone mad, no Britain has gone mad. I cannot believe what I see day in day out. Politicions....bah s*** them as we used to say.
FEAR NAUGHT
Should raw analytical data ever be passed to policy makers?
Cryin' shame...
Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
Abusing Yellow is meant to be a labor of love, not something you sell to the highest bidder.
Think of all that experience going down the pan just because they have reached the 22 year mark. I would have put them into Training Units or into recruitment offices up and down the Country rather than dismissing them out of hand like a used tissue.
Where did it say they were retired because they reached the 22 year mark? I only saw that it said they each had over 20 years in service.Think of all that experience going down the pan just because they have reached the 22 year mark. I would have put them into Training Units or into recruitment offices up and down the Country rather than dismissing them out of hand like a used tissue.
Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
Abusing Yellow is meant to be a labor of love, not something you sell to the highest bidder.
They say we "can't afford them" but they can pay failed Bankers £Billions in bonuses every quarter.
22 years is the normal length of service Ben , some get extended contracts tho .
TANKIE.
,Think of all that experience going down the pan just because they have reached the 22 year mark. I would have put them into Training Units or into recruitment offices up and down the Country rather than dismissing them out of hand like a used tissue.
Dave this is the common sense solution, but its all outsourcing now, hopefully the companies involved hire the right level of experience, my position for example right now is such an example, I work for an American company but with the British Army in Suffield as you know, but even though the government contracted an American company the job describtion for my position(s) was very specific and written by the MOD all 9 of us in the position I hold are all ex British Army senior ranks, with a minimum of 20 years experience and special to arms skills, qualifications and training.
Should raw analytical data ever be passed to policy makers?
We've got some blokes that already have 40 years in service
Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
Abusing Yellow is meant to be a labor of love, not something you sell to the highest bidder.
More to the point on this, how is it going to effect there pension? if as the document says they are at the 20 year point, (full) pension rights do not commence untill the 22 year mark, if retirment occurs prior to the 22 year mark then the pension is defered untill the soldiers 60th birthday. If this happens, if this is forced retirement to cost save! Then it is nothing but an absolute scandal and cost saving to a degree that I thought even politicions could not sink to.
Anyone know if anything has been said on this?
Should raw analytical data ever be passed to policy makers?
The maximum anyone can serve in the British Forces Ben is 35 years......maybe 37 noit sure now old age kicking in........have to check it out.
Should raw analytical data ever be passed to policy makers?
Well pointed out Wayne , i never saw the pension angle , it makes the action more despicable , they are lower than snakes nuts .
TANKIE.
RAF 'to sack one in four new pilots' as MoD writes off £300m spent on training. Another load of expensive experience dumped. Thank God we have a Navy...Doh!!!
Makes a boddy cringe huh Dave .
TANKIE.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Share this thread with friends: