SeanF Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 I need to find out. My union thinks there is a case so we can force at least 1 week (if not 1 month) more of wages out of him. The big problem was that I was only there 6 months and that he never gave me a written contract. However, apparently that should still default to the 1 week's payment or notice if employed for 1 month or more. Was a notice period ever agreed verbally, or in correspondence? Were you paid weekly or monthly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 I was paid monthly. There was a 3-month trial period, after which we were supposed to be on 1 month's notice (from both sides) but a paper contract was not provided. Apparently my MD was saying to other staffmembers (but not to me) that my trial period (during which time I could apparently be let go without any notice period at all) was extended by another 3 months, but this was a flat-out lie. Certainly I never agreed to that and there's no evidence of that. According to the union rep, it doesn't matter even if that was true, because after you've been employed for 1 month apparently you're entitled to 1 week's notice period regardless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeanF Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 I was paid monthly. There was a 3-month trial period, after which we were supposed to be on 1 month's notice (from both sides) but a paper contract was not provided. Apparently my MD was saying to other staffmembers (but not to me) that my trial period (during which time I could apparently be let go without any notice period at all) was extended by another 3 months, but this was a flat-out lie. Certainly I never agreed to that and there's no evidence of that. According to the union rep, it doesn't matter even if that was true, because after you've been employed for 1 month apparently you're entitled to 1 week's notice period regardless. Your union rep is correct. Your employer should have provided you with written particulars of employment, within 2 months of starting work. If your case goes to an Employment Tribunal, they can award 2-4 weeks pay as damages, for failure to do so. A contract can, however, be verbal. if you were told that it was one month on either side, then that's your entitlement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HexMachina Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 Junior doctors' contract set to be imposed, says Hunthttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-35548091 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Which Tyler Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 Hmmm, forcing people to sign contracts they refuse to sign - what could possibly go wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lessthanluke Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 He is actually a joke of a man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 Curious. Imposing the settlement simply won't work. There'll be a lot more strikes (maybe wildcat strikes?), doctors will quit or move abroad in droves and the functioning of the NHS itself will be imperilled. It might even be that this is the government's masterplan. At some point they fire Hunt (who is a disposable nonentity anyway) and announce sweeping rounds of privitisation (whilst never admitting 100% privitisation is their goal) of services and staffing until they get what they've always wanted, a fully private health system that no-one can afford but which the government doesn't have to worry about funding any more. The only problem with that it is that it requires more intelligence and forward planning than the government have shown they are capable of. Most likely this was simply a gross miscalculation by Hunt that's going to blow up in his face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liffguard Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 54 minutes ago, Werthead said: and the functioning of the NHS itself will be imperilled. It might even be that this is the government's masterplan. At some point they fire Hunt (who is a disposable nonentity anyway) and announce sweeping rounds of privitisation (whilst never admitting 100% privitisation is their goal) of services and staffing until they get what they've always wanted, a fully private health system that no-one can afford but which the government doesn't have to worry about funding any more. 1. Sabotage public services. 2. Allow them to limp on for a few years whilst the public forgets the cause of their poor performance. 3. Use the poor performance to privatise and sell off assets to various friends at cut-rate prices. 4. Profit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Arthur Hightower Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 46 minutes ago, Werthead said: Curious. Imposing the settlement simply won't work. There'll be a lot more strikes (maybe wildcat strikes?), doctors will quit or move abroad in droves and the functioning of the NHS itself will be imperilled. It might even be that this is the government's masterplan. At some point they fire Hunt (who is a disposable nonentity anyway) and announce sweeping rounds of privitisation (whilst never admitting 100% privitisation is their goal) of services and staffing until they get what they've always wanted, a fully private health system that no-one can afford but which the government doesn't have to worry about funding any more. The only problem with that it is that it requires more intelligence and forward planning than the government have shown they are capable of. Most likely this was simply a gross miscalculation by Hunt that's going to blow up in his face. I don't know if I'd agree it's a miscalculation, this government seems keen of pushing through unpopular reforms as quickly as possible, then simply trying to ignore the subsequent complaints/challenges. As little as I like it, the fact is that unless a lot else happens most people will forget about or grow bored with the current junior doctor issue in 6 months time, and so by the time the changes come into effect the doctors will have little public support. I also suspect that the Conservatives are going to push through a lot of very unpopular changes over the next 2-3 years or so, and that we will start to see less new things (or more things that people actually want, from 2018 or so onward. After all the Conservatives were incredibly unpopular throughout much of 2011 and 2012, it was only in 2014 that they started to gain a bit more support. So I reckon they know that if they may big reforms and cuts now it won't hurt their chances too much in 2020. There are a lot of ways this strategy could backfire obviously, but I wouldn't describe any of it as a miscalculation, simply high risk, high reward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeanF Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 Curious. Imposing the settlement simply won't work. There'll be a lot more strikes (maybe wildcat strikes?), doctors will quit or move abroad in droves and the functioning of the NHS itself will be imperilled. It might even be that this is the government's masterplan. At some point they fire Hunt (who is a disposable nonentity anyway) and announce sweeping rounds of privitisation (whilst never admitting 100% privitisation is their goal) of services and staffing until they get what they've always wanted, a fully private health system that no-one can afford but which the government doesn't have to worry about funding any more. The only problem with that it is that it requires more intelligence and forward planning than the government have shown they are capable of. Most likely this was simply a gross miscalculation by Hunt that's going to blow up in his face. I think it's more that there's nobody capable of providing effective opposition to the government, at least within Parliament. Labour are led by loons; the Lib Dems have vanished, and the SNP are confined to Scotland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HexMachina Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Some more details on the junior doctor contract, and also 10 chief executives denying they gave their assent to the letter. Junior doctors' row: NHS chiefs speak out over letterhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-35557135 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 13 hours ago, Werthead said: Curious. Imposing the settlement simply won't work. There'll be a lot more strikes (maybe wildcat strikes?), doctors will quit or move abroad in droves They don't even need to go abroad: just to Scotland. The contract doesn't apply here and the UK government can't impose it. This is also the hole in the 'cunning masterplan' theory - it's tougher to pull off if there's an actual counterexample right there. The imposition of the contract appears to be just overreach by Hunt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Which Tyler Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 Official petition to force parliament to discuss "Consider a vote of No Confidence in Jeremy Hunt, Health Secretary" https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/121152 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liffguard Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 And it's already well above 100,000 signatures. Impressive, not that anything will actually come from it unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Which Tyler Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 At this rate though, we could potentially force the discussion every month. Surely after repeatedly discussing the same thing they'd have to take the hint at some stage... wouldn't they? ... this IS supposed to be a democracy after all. ETA - looks like it reached the 100k in 62 hours! (created 4.45am on the 10th; threshold reached 6.20pm on the 12th) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Which Tyler Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lummel Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 To be fair to the former Hulture secretary, he hasn't got that much of a choice other than to impose contracts if he doesn't want to compromise on the normality or otherwise of Saturday working. On the other hand I'm not quite sure what the point is other than to avoid loosing face, admittedly something whose importance can hardly be underrated for a politician. If you want a 24/7 or even a 16/7 or an 8/7 health service its not just about normalising Saturday working for Junior Doctors as part of their rotas, it also requires Sundays and the same for all the ancillary health service workers, and social care. I'm not convinced the government wants to raise the money for that or has the stomach to fight it's way through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Which Tyler Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 He doesn't want that though - he wants to push doctors and patients (and ancillary workers) into the private sector that pays his pension fund. Ideally he wants to do it long enough before the next election that everyone will have forgotten by the time it comes around. If a few children die, then hey, it's a small price for him to pay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HexMachina Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 Meanwhile, in these lean financial times, MPs set to receive a pay rise over the 1% cap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Which Tyler Posted February 15, 2016 Share Posted February 15, 2016 What a nice man: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-hunt-talk-goes-ahead-after-doctors-were-told-it-was-cancelled-a6873546.html Quote Jeremy Hunt talk goes ahead after doctors were told it was cancelled. Doctors who had paid £15 for the event later found out it had quietly been moved to another location, with those in attendance being checked to ensure they hadn't brought any medics with them. ... I really can't see why good-faith negotiations keep breaking down; or why there appears to be a lack of good faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.