Wednesday, March 13, 2013

Annual General Meeting 14th March 2013 - Postponed

Please note that the Annual General Meeting that was advertised to some members as taking place tomorrow 14th March 2013 at the Danum Hotel has been cancelled.  Details of the re-arranged meeting will be widely publicised to members.  Please accept our apologies for any inconvenience this may cause and we will re-arrange the meeting as soon as we are in a position to do so.

Wednesday, December 05, 2012

Unfair Dismissal Claims Additional Information


Unfair Dismissal Claims – Additional Information

 

Due to the volume of calls etc regarding the forms that were recently sent out requesting information on financial losses, please note that we are now asking members to complete only the following information on the forms.  Once this has been provided we will do all the calculations on your behalf and forward this to Thompsons solicitors. 

 

The Deadline has been extended to Monday 17th December 2012.

 

Please provide the following information:-

 

Name & Address

 

Date of Birth

 

Date Commenced Employment

 

Date commenced employment means length of service you can use to calculate a redundancy payment e.g. If you worked for another Authority immediately prior to working for DMBC (without a break) this can be included in this date. Your contract of employment will have this date on.

 

Dismissal Date

 

This is the date the council gave you in your termination letter.

 

Age at date of dismissal

 

Length of Notice Period entitled to in weeks

 

This is the number of week’s notice you were given in your termination letter from the Council.

 

Gross Weekly Wage

 

Please provide a copy of your March & April Payslip and we will calculate other aspects.

 

Overtime and Mileage

 

Please provide details of any overtime or mileage that you claimed between 1st May 2012 and the end of your notice period.

 

 

 

** Please return the requested information by the deadline**

Thursday, August 16, 2012

Another Government Lie????


This week we attended the Overview and Scrutiny Committee for Adults and Communities, to discuss the Governments proposals to set up new boards for the NHS, and the monitoring by Local Councillors.



Our primary concern is one of the provisions up for consultation. It states that the NHS will be tasked with delivering service improvements against a backdrop of needing to make efficiencies (political speak for cutting the budget), whilst considering the financial and clinical sustainability of the proposals within existing resources (i.e. maintaining the current budgets).



Now we can comprehend cutting budgets, even if we disagree with it, and we can comprehend maximising services within the same budget. The question is;  how is the NHS meant to increase patient services at the current budget level whilst at the same time cutting those very same budgets?



Weren’t we told that NHS budgets would increase in real terms??



To err is human, but to really mess it up takes the ConDem Coalition.

Monday, July 23, 2012

Can You Put a Price On Justice?

Well it seems as though the Government is intent on doing so!

Not for themselves and for their very wealthy friends who are content to count (or bathe in) their money, happy in the knowledge that when they get caught they will, miraculously, suffer from collective amnesia you understand, but the price of justice for you, me and tens of thousands of people like us seems to be about to be set at £1200.

This is the message from the recently published Government response to consultation on the introduction of, "up-front," fees in Employment Tribunal cases https://consult.justice.gov.uk/digital-communications/et-fee-charging-regime-cp22-2011/results/employment-tribunal-fees-consultation-response.pdf

What this sets out is simply this - that from some point during late 2013 a new, "two-tier," fee structure will be introduced for those working people wanting to take a case to ET. For claims (including Unfair Dismissal and Discrimination) an initial fee of £250 will be payable just to submit a claim followed by a further payment of £950 to go to a hearing. So, a grand total of £1200, just to secure a shot at securing any kind of justice!

True, your employer may have to foot the bill for this if you win (on top of any compensation awarded) but you still have to find this money in advance of being allowed to proceed.

In some cases the fees are lower - a claim for, "Unauthorised Deductions from Wages," for example will cost £160 to submit and a further £230 to face a hearing. This is peanuts to many employers (and to Cameron's, "Millionaires Boys Club," Cabinet) but to many workers this will hugely restrict any access to justice they might once have enjoyed.

The TUC has, of course, condemned this move http://www.tuc.org.uk/equality/tuc-21213-f0.cfm and other trade unions have mounted a powerful argument against these proposals only to be ignored by government.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission, opposing these changes and the impact on combating discrimination in the workplace argued that,

  • "The Commission believes that requiring payment of a fee to bring a discrimination claim may breach the principle of effectiveness as it will make it difficult for individuals to enforce their EU law rights. We do not believe that the measures...will ensure that no one is denied access to justice through the introduction of a fee."
What this is is a transparent and naked attempt, by a government hostile to workers rights and to the limited protections afforded to working people, to discourage claims being brought to law and to give even greater freedom to bad employers to exploit their employees. Highly paid lobbyists and professional whingers acting on the behalf of employers (the CBI and Institute of Directors) continue to complain that it is too easy for workers to pursue misconceived claims, but as anyone who has ever tried it knows the truth is it's already tough to get justice.

Trade Unions need to ensure that commitments are given that would see a future Labour government repeal these changes and to begin now to put in place arrangements for determining who should pay these costs. We can not afford to wait and our members deserve clarity - justice is hard enough to come by without doors being slammed in their faces when their time of need is at it's greatest.