Gurkhas racially abused!

#1
GURKHAS: MOD IS RACIST



Gurkas being one of their toughest battles tomorrow

THE Gurkhas – who have won 6,500 decorations for bravery while fighting for Britain – begin one of their toughest battles tomorrow.

They are taking on the Ministry of Defence, claiming its treatment of them has been racist.

Four Nepalese soldiers are taking their case to an Employment Tribunal in London. And if they are successful their action could topple a ruling that has left thousands of the most vulnerable Gurkha veterans in abject poverty.

The Gurkhas’ battle for equal ­pension rights suffered a setback when the Government ruled that citizenship rights and fairer pensions would apply only to currently-serving Gurkhas.

This ruling leaves many of the most vulnerable Gurkhas trying to survive on just £23 a month or nothing, ­campaigners have claimed.

Tomorrow the four Gurkhas will argue that the fact that they received less in pay and perks than British troops is a case of racial discrimination.

What a way of treating the finest fighting men in the world.This MoD should be bloody ashamed of itself.
 
#3
They aren't being "abused" so much as neglected. Though, one can argue that neglect is a form of abuse. Oh whatever, they deserve equal pensions. They bleed like any other soldier.
 
#4
Without getting to complicated, in a lot of the treatment issues in the run up to the current change of TACOS, the British were tied by an agreement with India and Nepal as to what they could and couldn't do.

It was called the Tri-Partite agreement.

The old Gurkha TACOS were pretty fair considering, but have changed. This may be due to the different circumstances that modern Gurkhas contend with.
 
#5
chocolate_frog said:
Without getting to complicated, in a lot of the treatment issues in the run up to the current change of TACOS, the British were tied by an agreement with India and Nepal as to what they could and couldn't do.

It was called the Tri-Partite agreement.

The old Gurkha TACOS were pretty fair considering, but have changed. This may be due to the different circumstances that modern Gurkhas contend with.
Agreed - it was all about cash. However times have changed - they belong to us - pay them as equals. I wonder what they would have done if challenged by the Iranians?
 
#6
True, they were tied to the TACOS, but when it came to applying to remain in the UK and become citezens they were treated badly. It all builds up resentment. Good luck to them.
 
#7
rickshaw-major said:
I wonder what they would have done if challenged by the Iranians?
LOL....They wouldnt have had IPOD's for starters, most likely outcome would have been pretty bad for the eyerabs.
 
#8
Not that I don't agree with giving the Gurkha's their due, but didn't they sign up to the T's & C's at the time and they were happy with them then. (or they wouldn't have applied?)
 

cpunk

LE
Moderator
#9
chocolate_frog said:
Without getting to complicated, in a lot of the treatment issues in the run up to the current change of TACOS, the British were tied by an agreement with India and Nepal as to what they could and couldn't do.

It was called the Tri-Partite agreement.
I think a lot of Gurkha rights campaigners would suggest that the Tripartite Agreement was only adhered to because it suited the UK Government to adhere to it. I believe the Indian Army let it slide years ago.
 
B

Biscuits_AB

Guest
#10
Good luck to them, I hope they get what they are after, each and every one of them!!

They deserve it.
 
#14
For 100 non issues there is 1 real case, its a simple premise - all soldiers running the same risks and giving the same service deserve the same pay regardless of any other factor.

UK PLC has been having soliders on the cheap which is insulting to them and to rest of the Army.

Good luck with the case lads!
 
#15
wood_gnome said:
Do the Gurkhas not recieve pay and perks like everybody else? I thought we were all the same. If they dont then they should.
A little tradition in the Brigade of Gurkhas known as KIDA (Keep Them in the Dark Ages). It will always be argued that a Gurkha unit is a world within a world but in reality it is just a way of keeping them cheap. Let's hope they get what they deserve but still keep their long leave.
 
#16
cpunk said:
chocolate_frog said:
Without getting to complicated, in a lot of the treatment issues in the run up to the current change of TACOS, the British were tied by an agreement with India and Nepal as to what they could and couldn't do.

It was called the Tri-Partite agreement.
I think a lot of Gurkha rights campaigners would suggest that the Tripartite Agreement was only adhered to because it suited the UK Government to adhere to it. I believe the Indian Army let it slide years ago.
Forgive me for saying so but isn't this one of the things that we as a country are supposed to be proud of, that when we make an agreement we stick by it? I wonder how Nepal would feel if we were to simply "let it slide", I think they have an interest in the matter, don't they? Something along the lines of "if the terms and conditions for British Gurkha recruits are too good we will effectively cream-off the brightest and best of Nepali society to the detriment of that country".
Make no mistake about it, there will come a day when some hard-nosed politician, faced with the the choice of disbanding a British Battalion or the Gurkhas will take the entirely pragmatic decision, there being no votes to be had in Kathmandu, to bin the Gurkhas. I'm all for giving Rai, Thapa and Pun a fair crack of the whip but to hear these brave men whining about "Racism" is distasteful and demeaning to them IMHO!
 
#18
rickshaw-major said:
I wonder what they would have done if challenged by the Iranians?
I think we all know the answer to that and it wouldn't have culminated in the embarrassing spectacle that we have had to endure. One can confidently say that a 15 strong detachment of Gurkhas would have gone down swinging and taken a good few with them. It is incomprehensible therefore that they do not recieve at least the same pay and pension rights as the likes of Turney & Co.

Come on Liarbour, pay them what they deserve (past and present). Or are there no votes in it for you?
 

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#19
Trilateral agreements aside, I personally find it disgusting that we don't give them the same perks and benefits that we give British troops.

It doesn't matter that it is a king's ransom in Nepal and they can live the high life on it. By our standards it's not a huge sum and it is us they serve. When these guys are serving in European theaters, it's not often they can go out and enjoy themselves like our boys do because they simply don't have the money, notwithstanding the pensions issue at the end of it.

There are few braver soldiers in the world, and few as committed. It is a sad indictment that they have to use race laws to get what I believe is only fair and proper.

I would like to see them treated as equals in every respect; they deserve nothing less.
 
B

Biscuits_AB

Guest
#20
Quite a few Gurkhas are discriminated against back in the Nepalese jobs market. The locals won't employ them because the perception is that they are in reciept of a large pension and don't need the money. The truth is that what they do get in pensions, doesn't go the long way that this Government would have you believe.

Having seen them on the box down in Afghanistan, in comparison with Turney and Batchelor's fiasco, I reckon that the Gurkha is worth every penny of a proper pension, so is his Dad, his Grandad and all his other relatives who have worn a British Army Uniform. Moreso than some tab smoking, iPod wearing waste of f*cking rations.
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top