Gurkhas win right to sue Britain

#2
Cherie Blair is representing them...

How very, for the lack of a more appropriate word, interesting.
 
#4
Of course the ghurkas are treated differently, as it says in the report their terms and conditions are the result of an international agreement. Compared with the salaries etc in Nepal they come back from the British Army as very well off men, hence the reason why there are so many volunteers. If they're not careful they will price themselves out of the market. Interestingly the lawyer mentoned in the piece, phil shiner, is I believe the one making all the running in the Iraqi 'abuse' case. What an intriguing coincidence
 
#5
I remember one of the former Gurkha oficers here saying that there are now more 'Gurkhas or people of Nepalese decent' in Hong Kong then there ever was under British rule.
Large families are creating a massive Nepalese section of the community. The fathers, ex Brit forces, have no problems finding jobs with security companys but the children are a social problem, no disipline brought up as outsiders and one more social problem for the future.
Same source said the Indian Army has more Gurkhas then the Brits have infantry.
My father said he owed his life to a Gurkha patrol back in Burma WW II. I served one year with them in Brunei and I have never had much time for them in a peace time army.
I would cut connctions with them and save a brit battalion or two, Far more Versitile.
john
 
#6
If the Court decides that the Gurkha soldiers should come under the same terms and conditions as a British soldier, then that'll probably be the demise of the Gurkha soldier within the British Army.
 
#7
They're doing the same job as you guys, for less money, and you seem to think you're doing them a favour? Fcuk off.

The little buggers are hard as coffin nails, they've worked bloody hard for us, harder than 99.9% of British squaddies and although no-one wold admit it, secretly everyone's a little scared of them. As someone else has said on this site, they're the only people a drunk Para wouldn't pick a fight with.

The fact of the matter is that in the grand scale of things, the cost of paying them an equal wage and pension is peanuts. About 1/2 a Typhoon or a weekend in Iraq, tops.

Cut 'em some slack, if HM forces had performance related pay they'd be making more than anyone else.
 
#8
#9
Crabfastic/Semper it is very easy to get starry eyed where Jonny G is conncerned, most people who have never served with them believe the properganda.
Gurkhas of today are not the men of WW II. Simple country folk but not stupid, they too have learned to play the discrimination game.
I drink frequently with a 85/86 year old who did Burma 42-45 and then spent many years in far east untill he retired and he says they and their officers where always a problem in a peacetime army, special treatment, not the ordinary terms as for Indian soldiers, part of whos army they where.
I doubt no mans courage and that goes for all the Brit battalions long since disbanded.
Yell us about you service with Jonny G.
john
 
#10
Never has a country had such loyal soldiers for so small a price! You can not heap enough praise on them, history junky or not.
Granted this is getting up there in the politics of the day, who the government wants living here, Nepalese Gurkhas or Polish Plumbers and builders etc.
But for all their odd habits, slaughtering of chickens in the shower block sinks, evil temper if they think you have offended them, fanatical desire to be the best and ability to break or hump anything they come across, they are the best infantry (and all arms troops) i have ever had the honour to work with.
The UK owes them from WW 1 and WW 2 service as well as Malaya, Brunei, and Kosovo and many more ops to date. Currently only 2 Bns, and one of them is based in Brunei, therefore paid for by the Sultan of Brunei, so as with the rest of the garrison out there does not cost the UK tax payer.
As with any good troops, they are night mare in peace time.... how many times have you heard of / seen/ been in a unit that was "gated" from the local community (pubs etc) as when they go out some where they get drunk and tear the place appart?
 
#11
There is a lot of rubbish talked about Gurkhas and their so called loyalty to the British crown, they are loyal because they are well paid to be (relatively speaking), that's fair enough but let's not get all starry eyed about it, they are also incredibly over rated due to a v ery good propaganda effort especially by British Gurkha officers who have the life of riley and get treated like little tin gods (with their own orderly etc). Any Brit Inf Bn is much better and more flexible in the modern world with the multiplicity of complicated tasks which soldiering in the 21st century involves. The thing the Gurkhas have going for them is that they are cheap and there is no shortage of recruits so it behoves them not to shoot themselves in the foot by being too greedy
 
#13
Hang on...

Didn't you all volunteer to join the Army?

So what makes you so bloody different?

They like you do a job and do it well, why on earth shouldnt they have the same wages and pensions you have?
 
#14
crabtastic said:
They're doing the same job as you guys, for less money, and you seem to think you're doing them a favour? Fcuk off.

The little buggers are hard as coffin nails, they've worked bloody hard for us, harder than 99.9% of British squaddies and although no-one wold admit it, secretly everyone's a little scared of them. As someone else has said on this site, they're the only people a drunk Para wouldn't pick a fight with.

The fact of the matter is that in the grand scale of things, the cost of paying them an equal wage and pension is peanuts. About 1/2 a Typhoon or a weekend in Iraq, tops.

Cut 'em some slack, if HM forces had performance related pay they'd be making more than anyone else.
HERE HERE!!!!

I agree wholeheartedly with that! The Ghurkas are an EXCELLENT bunch of guys and should definately be paid the same as a British soldier, if not more.
 
#15
mereminx said:
Hang on...

Didn't you all volunteer to join the Army?

So what makes you so bloody different?

They like you do a job and do it well, why on earth shouldnt they have the same wages and pensions you have?
.....er, I'm British, I'm in the British Army, there is a Nepalese Army they could join in their own countryThen thig is the pay in that army is a fraction of what they get working for us, let's not get too starry eyed, as i said the gurkha pay is regulated by an international treaty, they get very well paid by Nepalese standards so who can blame them for volunteering in such numbers. Also, 'should be paid more than a British soldier', I don't think so and I suspect most British soldiers who have had cause to work with Gurkhas recently would say the same
 
#16
Is this really about Gurkhas' rights, or about dear Cherie keeping up the mortgage repayments on the house? I remember hearing that they're prohibitive & the rent doesn't cover them completely...
Is Shiner one of the the Blair Set BTW?
 
#17
If they are no longer cheaper then they are not VFM. They have serious limitations and they are not the loyal little chaps they pretend to be. The resturanteur was being very economical with the truth when he said he was a british soldier he knew he was a Gurkha and that he would always be on a different package. The deal was done when we bailed out of India. We should honour that deal and nothing more.

Sorry Johnnie G but you knew the deal when you signed on. It is time to return home and buy your farm (really not die). If you do not like this then go to India where your chums are and use your pension to buy some peace of mind there. Your pension is still larger than the Indian Army one for Gurkhas.
 
#18
Temple said:
mereminx said:
Hang on...

Didn't you all volunteer to join the Army?

So what makes you so bloody different?

They like you do a job and do it well, why on earth shouldnt they have the same wages and pensions you have?
.....er, I'm British, I'm in the British Army, there is a Nepalese Army they could join in their own countryThen thig is the pay in that army is a fraction of what they get working for us, let's not get too starry eyed, as i said the gurkha pay is regulated by an international treaty, they get very well paid by Nepalese standards so who can blame them for volunteering in such numbers. Also, 'should be paid more than a British soldier', I don't think so and I suspect most British soldiers who have had cause to work with Gurkhas recently would say the same
OK, so by your rationale we should cut the pay of the Micks, Aussies, Kiwis, Canucks, Jamaicans, Grenadians etc. serving in the British armed forces too? I'm sure Pte Beharry VC would be delighted. If you can do the work, you deserve the same reward as everyone else. The end.
 
#20
crabtastic said:
Temple said:
mereminx said:
Hang on...

Didn't you all volunteer to join the Army?

So what makes you so bloody different?

They like you do a job and do it well, why on earth shouldnt they have the same wages and pensions you have?
.....er, I'm British, I'm in the British Army, there is a Nepalese Army they could join in their own countryThen thig is the pay in that army is a fraction of what they get working for us, let's not get too starry eyed, as i said the gurkha pay is regulated by an international treaty, they get very well paid by Nepalese standards so who can blame them for volunteering in such numbers. Also, 'should be paid more than a British soldier', I don't think so and I suspect most British soldiers who have had cause to work with Gurkhas recently would say the same
OK, so by your rationale we should cut the pay of the Micks, Aussies, Kiwis, Canucks, Jamaicans, Grenadians etc. serving in the British armed forces too? I'm sure Pte Beharry VC would be delighted. If you can do the work, you deserve the same reward as everyone else. The end.
I'm afraid you obviously don't undersand my rationale at all, different people join up under different terms of service, British and eligible commonwealth citzens can join up under one set of terms, Gurkhas under another as Nepal isn't, and never has been a member of the commonwealth. As to whether Gurkhas can, and indeed do, do the same same work? That's a moot point as those who've actually worked with the Gurkhas (preferably more recently than he 1960s) will be able to voice their own opinions on. In my own personal opinion they are vastly overrated compared with the average british infantryman. As I said before (more than once) the fundamental point is that Gurkha terms of service are regulated by international agreement, if it was so iniquitous why would we have so many volunteers?
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top