Welcome to E-Goat :: The Totally Unofficial Royal Air Force Rumour Network
Join our free community to unlock a range of benefits like:
  • Post and participate in discussions.
  • Send and receive private messages with other members.
  • Respond to polls and surveys.
  • Upload and share content.
  • Gain access to exclusive features and tools.
Join 7.5K others today

Rumour on Social Media

  • Following weeks of work, the E-GOAT team are delighted to present to you a new look to the forums with plenty of new features. Take a look around and see what you think!
Trending This Week
View More Trending
I can't see that happening. We have too many rights now. Not saying that is a bad thing, but we live in a world of grey instead of the autocratic black and white one the RAF and its senior leadership thinks it is.
 
Just been told be a serving member at an ex bomber station near the A15 that the rumour is total nonsense.

puts that one to bed.
 
Agreed this is nonsense but might they follow the government and make mess dos beer calls and the like fully vaccinated events only?
 
No Jab no free socks is what I’ve heard.

I know where I am, yes Civi street, we are about to take away COVID Sickness as a separate absence, and any absence in future will be managed like any other.

I expect it to be from the 16th when double jabbed no longer have to isolate, we’ll make allowances for those with medical reasons for not having it as per the law.

Of course when the next variant or wave comes along things might change.
 
busby1971 said:
No Jab no free socks is what I’ve heard.

I know where I am, yes Civi street, we are about to take away COVID Sickness as a separate absence, and any absence in future will be managed like any other.

I expect it to be from the 16th when double jabbed no longer have to isolate, we’ll make allowances for those with medical reasons for not having it as per the law.

Of course when the next variant or wave comes along things might change.
Click to expand...
Interesting to hear that Busby. My place of work is still treating Covid symptoms as exempt the normal sickness triggers, and I honestly cant remember the last time anyone was off sick with something that wasnt covered under the covid symptoms - folk have long since cottoned onto that if you call in Monday with "symptoms", arrange a home test that arrives late on Tuesday, return it on Wednesday and declare your result around 4pm on Friday, then you get a week off and there's nothing the employer can do with regards sickness triggers. The vaccine take-up rate in the post-codes around my workplace (which also attract around 50% of the workforce) is a paltry 45% for 2 jabs and 30% for 1 jab. I'm beginning to think the only way these type of people will get a jab is to scrap this "cough and you're off" culture and treat covid like any other illness for sickness purposes, then when we have the post sickness formal attendance meetings, I will be able to explore what precautions they took to prevent infection, and base my decision to recommend dismissal on whether they got jabbed.
 
muttywhitedog said:
I'm beginning to think the only way these type of people will get a jab is to scrap this "cough and you're off" culture and treat covid like any other illness for sickness purposes, then when we have the post sickness formal attendance meetings, I will be able to explore what precautions they took to prevent infection, and base my decision to recommend dismissal on whether they got jabbed.
Click to expand...

How will you integrate that plan for people with hidden conditions who may have been advised not to accept the vaccine by their doctors? What gives you the right to "recommend dismissal" for people in those circumstances?
 
Talk Wrench said:
How will you integrate that plan for people with hidden conditions who may have been advised not to accept the vaccine by their doctors? What gives you the right to "recommend dismissal" for people in those circumstances?
Click to expand...
Simple OH referral will sort that out, if you’ve got a genuine reason not to have the vaccine then you might be given a little extra time off, although nothing like the free reign of the past 18 months, and probably not at full pay, unless you are a public servant.

Having a disability isn’t a get out of jail free cards, it’s a let’s both be reasonable card. If COVID is never going to go away and you won’t ever be able to do your job again (let’s say this means meeting about 80% of normal performance) then no one can expect an employer to support you, that’s the states job.

Listening to the recent Union sabre rattling, and their behaviour throughout this, they know what’s next and are already drawing the battle lines.
 
muttywhitedog said:
I will be able to explore what precautions they took to prevent infection, and base my decision to recommend dismissal on whether they got jabbed.
Click to expand...
Would that not mean you're relying on something wholly anecdotal? Interested on how you'd go down this route without leaving yourself and your company wide open to some sort of accusation of unfair dismissal.
 
busby1971 said:
Simple OH referral will sort that out, if you’ve got a genuine reason not to have the vaccine then you might be given a little extra time off, although nothing like the free reign of the past 18 months, and probably not at full pay, unless you are a public servant.

Having a disability isn’t a get out of jail free cards, it’s a let’s both be reasonable card. If COVID is never going to go away and you won’t ever be able to do your job again (let’s say this means meeting about 80% of normal performance) then no one can expect an employer to support you, that’s the states job.

Listening to the recent Union sabre rattling, and their behaviour throughout this, they know what’s next and are already drawing the battle lines.
Click to expand...
Busby1971,

As always, a reasoned reply. It's interesting what you say about the unions...because where I am, they're having a field day with some of our HR bods being sent on "extended leave" with full pay. (Unlike the people they've condemned to social security.)
 
Part of the Managing Attendance Policy comprises of a formal meeting once a sickness trigger is breached at which the manager discusses with the employee what positive action they have taken or are taking to improve their attendance, so if someone has been off, for example, three times for five days at a time with "Covid Symptoms" it is entirely reasonable for the manager to ask what steps they have taken to prevent infection (ie vaccinations). If person A is exempt the vaccination on medical grounds then they would be looked on more favourably than person B who just doesnt want the jab, as person B would not be seen to be doing everything they can to prevent infection or illness.

As long as the AM process is followed, then someone can be considered for dismissal once they breach certain trigger and warning points. As a fellow CS, you should know that. You should also know that it takes a lot of balls to get rid of a CS for a poor sickness record, and most dismissal hearings end up as final final final (there wont be any more, I promise) written warnings.
 
Some HR people find it hard to speak truth to power, it’s not about saying no, it’s not about saying yes, it’s about giving valid and convincing advice on what the right thing to do is.

It’s entirely normal for an operationally focussed manager to be only focussed on the operation, at the detriment of their and others people.
 
Frankly given the number of youth that refuse to vacc where I work I support this policy.
 
muttywhitedog said:
Part of the Managing Attendance Policy comprises of a formal meeting once a sickness trigger is breached at which the manager discusses with the employee what positive action they have taken or are taking to improve their attendance, so if someone has been off, for example, three times for five days at a time with "Covid Symptoms" it is entirely reasonable for the manager to ask what steps they have taken to prevent infection (ie vaccinations). If person A is exempt the vaccination on medical grounds then they would be looked on more favourably than person B who just doesnt want the jab, as person B would not be seen to be doing everything they can to prevent infection or illness.

As long as the AM process is followed, then someone can be considered for dismissal once they breach certain trigger and warning points. As a fellow CS, you should know that. You should also know that it takes a lot of balls to get rid of a CS for a poor sickness record, and most dismissal hearings end up as final final final (there wont be any more, I promise) written warnings.
Click to expand...
Mutty,

Tens of thousands are being forced to isolate because they've been pinged by the NHS app. So if a pinged employee follows the recommendation of SAGE, government guidelines, politicians of all flavours and does the right thing by going into self isolation in accordance with accepting the responsibility of being pinged, someone, somewhere may be plotting to oust them from their job. That's a real possibility, so what mechanism does HR have to prevent an unfair dismissal in this case?
 
On the 16th the need to isolate becomes a choice, for most people.

choose to get jabbed then no need.

choose not to get jabbed then you have to isolate.

I don’t care if you choose either, however, if you choose not to get jabbed then you need to understand that you could lose your salary or job.

That’s your choice at the end of the day.
 
busby1971 said:
I don’t care if you choose either, however, if you choose not to get jabbed then you need to understand that you could lose your salary or job.
Click to expand...
The jab is a choice, to not have the jab is a choice.

If that choice is no jab, what you're really saying is "no jab, no job". That stinks.

By the way, I've had two doses of Biontech despite being told not to by the administering doctor. My choice, no problems. And bizarrely, my knees have stopped aching!
 
Talk Wrench said:
The jab is a choice, to not have the jab is a choice.

If that choice is no jab, what you're really saying is "no jab, no job". That stinks.
Click to expand...
When you make a choice you must take into account the consequences of that choice, if I choose to speed I can’t complain if I get a speeding ticket, it’s not reasonable for any employer to fund your choices.

I wouldn’t wish COVID or long COVID on anyone but if you suffer from either and haven’t chosen the jab then you’ve got to take personal responsibility for that decision. Also remember that you are also more likely to be hospitalised and die and you are more likely to pass it on to others, including those who cannot have the Jab for medical reasons.
 
busby1971 said:
When you make a choice you must take into account the consequences of that choice, if I choose to speed I can’t complain if I get a speeding ticket, it’s not reasonable for any employer to fund your choices.
Click to expand...
If someone chooses to speed, they are breaking the law. If they lose their job because they lose their licence (professional driver, reliant on the car for their job etc) then it's a fair cop.

Being threatened with job loss because a private individual has LEGALLY chosen to not accept a vaccine, absolutely stinks. They haven't broken the law, but I wonder what laws are being broken by the unseen scribes in the back office?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top