Should the army provide childcare?

#2
Zapped said:
Personally, I had to pay for my own childcare, I had to marry her and it cost me the earth!!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...e-Army-failed-provide-adequate-childcare.html
Firstly what utter tripe... I know all about the childcare issues, I have them myself, but we knew that we would be expected to work late, start early, deploy on ops etc etc.. Has this now opened the flood gates for many other single parents to put in discrimination claims?

Secondly there is no way on this earth that munter would manage 22 years service...... 8O
 
#5
She should've thought about that before she HAD the child surely? She knew the nature of the job.
 
#6
The case has nothing whatsoever to do with the Army failing to provide child-care facilities.

It is, however, to do with the fact that the Army failed to assist her to make adequate provision for her child. What was the problem in assisting her to bring her sister over to act as live-in carer? It would have cost nothing, and would have avoided the subsequent court case - it's merely demonstrating duty of care to one's soldiers'.
 
#7
Strange isnt it, before I even clicked on the linky, I just knew she wouldnt be of English origin.



And sit back and wait.
 
#8
no mention of the child's father? Surely he should take half of the responsibility for caring for the child? it takes two to tango.............
 
#9
I'm sorry, but if they'd pulled strings to get her sister into the country, it sets a precedence for everyone else to do it! What if she'd got her over here and left the army anyway??
 
#10
bigbird67 said:
I'm sorry, but if they'd pulled strings to get her sister into the country, it sets a precedence for everyone else to do it! What if she'd got her over here and left the army anyway??
There's no need to 'pull strings' - there's merely a need to facilitate the legal process through the Immigration Service. That would, perhaps, have been sufficient to demonstrate sufficient 'duty of care'.
 
#11
pombsen-armchair-warrior said:
bigbird67 said:
I'm sorry, but if they'd pulled strings to get her sister into the country, it sets a precedence for everyone else to do it! What if she'd got her over here and left the army anyway??
There's no need to 'pull strings' - there's merely a need to facilitate the legal process through the Immigration Service. That would, perhaps, have been sufficient to demonstrate sufficient 'duty of care'.
Seems a reasonable way of tackling the situation - a supporting letter to the consulate stating the facts would have probably got a 6 month visa and if necessary an extension whilst arrangements were made. They gave my mother in law an extra 3 months when my twins were born - darn them!
 
#12
pombsen-armchair-warrior said:
bigbird67 said:
I'm sorry, but if they'd pulled strings to get her sister into the country, it sets a precedence for everyone else to do it! What if she'd got her over here and left the army anyway??
There's no need to 'pull strings' - there's merely a need to facilitate the legal process through the Immigration Service. That would, perhaps, have been sufficient to demonstrate sufficient 'duty of care'.
Oh fook off

Duty of care does not include paying out 6 figure sums to some chancer who is playing the labour government race card come human rights shite.

Bring in yet another immigrant to scrounge of the state, whilst looking after a child that could have child care found by its parent locally, without the need to bring in yet another waster.

What was her job at chavski bks anyway?

Hardly war effort is it?

What a crock of shite, if this is the case, then all service personel with kids should get paid for not seeing their own children for 6 months at a time, human rights of a parent and all that!

Fookin left wing tw@ gets on my manly moobs.




Why can none of you see that she is playing the shite system thats been created?

Try spending more time fighting for actual causes that require it, than this sort of bollocks.

Lets see some 6 figure sums paid to troops who are now totally disabled, then when thats all sorted, come back with your human rights duty of care shite.


child care? shite.
 
#13
bigbird67 said:
I'm sorry, but if they'd pulled strings to get her sister into the country, it sets a precedence for everyone else to do it! What if she'd got her over here and left the army anyway??
Interestingly, in a statement put out by a firm of solicitors, they write of relatives', (plural apostrophe).
Solicitors are usually quite precise in their wording so it's not unreasonable to think that more than one applicant was involved.

It would be up to the Border Agency to grant entry, if the MOD didn't support such an application, they quite likely had their reasons.

Link MoD forced to 'EAT its words concerning single mum'

'EAT' being a pretty dire pun by the solicitors on Employment Appeal Tribunal
 
#14
Stop recruitment of women into the Army unless they are bratless and sterilised.......
 
#16
CAARPS said:
Gren said:
child care? shite.
Gren for once I am in agreement (and I know it is rare :D )

A soldier should be deployable or f*ck Off

Sadly, I think the term "soldier" is being used in the media sense, rather than the reality sense in this case.
 
#18
pombsen-armchair-warrior said:
bigbird67 said:
I'm sorry, but if they'd pulled strings to get her sister into the country, it sets a precedence for everyone else to do it! What if she'd got her over here and left the army anyway??
There's no need to 'pull strings' - there's merely a need to facilitate the legal process through the Immigration Service. That would, perhaps, have been sufficient to demonstrate sufficient 'duty of care'.
Or she could have arranged her own child care and paid for it like others do. Concidering she was already released from night and weekend duties, I don't see how she was discriminated against.
 
#19
pombsen-armchair-warrior said:
bigbird67 said:
I'm sorry, but if they'd pulled strings to get her sister into the country, it sets a precedence for everyone else to do it! What if she'd got her over here and left the army anyway??
There's no need to 'pull strings' - there's merely a need to facilitate the legal process through the Immigration Service. That would, perhaps, have been sufficient to demonstrate sufficient 'duty of care'.
So why could she not pay for childcare like every other single working mother has to??
 
#20
buttonsin3s said:
CAARPS said:
Gren said:
child care? shite.
Gren for once I am in agreement (and I know it is rare :D )

A soldier should be deployable or f*ck Off
Gren agree with you (now off to give my heed a shake).


For the non Guards type, what he is saying there is....

Im a porridge wog, and so as I dont quite understand, im off for a wank, JB will explain further if needed ;)
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top