Mon, Oct 30th, TUPE part 2 - a little staff vote

My email:

Guys and gals,

A moment of your time please. As most of you will have noticed I have stepped back into the fray of this good ship, the SS Titanic, from a 3 month sabbatical touring the US with Paris Hilton (ahem) and have returned to find my employers have lost the only other contract Fleet are working on so hard. On reading through the backlog of emails regarding it, I felt none the wiser as to the future of my job, so yesterday I asked some questions. This prompted the exit manager, Ginola, to say what he said all of a sudden - which was, errr, "I know nothing, get back to the oars".


Before I go further read this. These are you rights, in Law.

Rights to consultation
Your employer must consult the representatives of the workforce about the transfer. This will either be with trade union officials (if you have a union) or employee representatives who are usually elected by the workforce.
You must be told:

• when and why a transfer of business is happening
• what the impact on employees will be
• whether any measures like reorganisation will be taken, and how they’ll affect you
  The information must be given in good time and the consultation must be carried out with the aim of coming to an agreement. If any reorganisation is planned, your representative can put forward your views. Your employer must reply to these and say why if they reject them.
• Your representative can complain to an Employment Tribunal if the employer fails to inform and consult. The complaint should succeed unless there were exceptional circumstances preventing your employer from informing and consulting (for example, events outside their control).

Source ref


OK. I now want feedback from everyone on the following


Quality Quiz

Q1: Are you happy with the communications you have received so far? Yes, No



Q2: Is the communication clear and succinct?



Q3: If not, do you just want basic answers?



Q4: Are you happy and secure in your job?



Q5: Are you at all concerned about being "judged" as not "in-scope" in some unilateral decision