The 'Brown Envelope' is replaced by the 'Brown email'

#1
In a nutshell on the 11th & 12th January 2011, 38 SNCO's recieved their 12 months notice by a generic email. This email did not go through their respective Chain of Command (CoC), the SNCO's were told to inform their CoC. It has been said that this is yet another example of 'David Cameron's' lack of care and understanding of the armed forces. At least one of these SNCO's was serving in Afgahn at the time he recieved the email. The following link gives more details and the email that was sent out.

http://www.arrse.co.uk/rhq-personnel-pay-discipline/154001-lsl-veng-lc-2011-posting-plot-freeze.html
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#2
So, if the SNCOs don't tell their CoC then they can carry on jogging as normal? Somehow I don't think so.

It is not a very good way to treat people who have given so much to the army. Remember the press uproar when some guy sacked his staff by text message? Not a lot of difference here and a distinct lack of cojones from some very senior officers. IMHO
 
#5
Don't quite see what DC had to do with this. Or are you suggesting he's attempting to run the manpower plot, not the country?

[Wonders which is harder??]
 
#8
Don't quite see what DC had to do with this. Or are you suggesting he's attempting to run the manpower plot, not the country?

[Wonders which is harder??]
It shows his ignorance of the whole SDSR and that the he trust the 'suits' behind the closed doors in DM (A) in Land. But when HQ Land found out, they were outraged as well and they are in the same building as DM (A). It dosn't exactly fill you with confidence?
 
#9
Its like the old NOTACAS joke. "All those with mothers alive at home stand up, sit down Jones".
 
#10
Someone mentioned this the other day.

On O type there are MCPs, where you can be given 12 months notice and your resettlement, but after 15 I beleive only redundancy can be used.

They were under the impression that V type has the facility to MCP you at any point with 12 months notice.
 
#11
PM pledges no use of Manning Control instead of proper redundancy payments Prime Minister David Cameron, answering MPs' questions following his Statement on the SDSR, gave the assurance that the resulting reductions in the numbers of service personnel would not involve the use of manning control instead of "proper redundancy payments". Against a historic background of real injustice to some individuals during earlier times of financial stringency and forces downsizing, BAFF welcomes this important confirmation by the PM and looks to the MoD and service authorities to ensure that it is not overlooked in practice.

The assurance was given in a reply to Eric Joyce MP (Falkirk, Lab) and can be found at this link:

•Strategic Defence and Security Review - Oral Answers - 19 Oct 2010
 
#12
Even if you opened it and a read receipt was sent, it still does not prove the recipient actually read the contents as many a company has found out in court.
Oh, I've had customers in the past claim they never received emails go quiet when I show them server logs showing their PC as having accessed those emails. It's probably not enough for legal standards of proof, but when you get to the point that you both know they're lying, few people can convincingly maintain the act.

"So the server log shows that your computer accessed the mail server and downloaded message number X at 14:37.06 on the day in question and yet you still maintain you know nothing about it? Luckily for you, we now have your computer for a forensic data analysis to help you find proof you never downloaded this email and therefore uphold your claim - let's just hope we don't uncover evidence of something more serious, eh? So - should we keep looking or do you want to reconsider your assertion that you never saw this email?"
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#13
It is WOs & SNCOs with many years of experience we are talking about here so of course they can lie with the best of them. :)
 
#14
Some courts have forced companies to turn over entire mail servers and email records to resolve legal issues and contract disputes so emails can be used in court. In fact courts themselves use emails as a normal form of communication & it's viewed the same as 'snail-mail'.
 
#15
Some courts have forced companies to turn over entire mail servers and email records to resolve legal issues and contract disputes so emails can be used in court. In fact courts themselves use emails as a normal form of communication & it's viewed the same as 'snail-mail'.
But it isn't the same as the CO or OC of the unit in question being informed of what is to happen and thus breaking the news personally.

ie. The upper end of the chain (ie the originators) manning the fcuk up and delivering the sh1t sandwiches properly.

It might be 'ok' in civvie strasse. But I'd like to think in the Forces it was considered terribley bad form if one wasn't informed through the chain of command. I'd also imagine, if I was higher up the food chain, I would be rather p1ssed off if the first I knew of one of my blokes being 'let go' was when they came to me with such an e-mail.
 
#16
Even if you opened it and a read receipt was sent, it still does not prove the recipient actually read the contents as many a company has found out in court.
Well compare it to a letter: If you have received the letter and opened it then it's probably fair to say that you have given the contents a glancing read. If you read the first few words and didn't like it then you're at fault. If you didn't open a letter with, presumably, OHMS on it then you were negligent.

Dogmeat's on the money with mail servers and forensics - the logs are somewhat more detailed than 'read receipts''.
 
#17
But it isn't the same as the CO or OC of the unit in question being informed of what is to happen and thus breaking the news personally.

ie. The upper end of the chain (ie the originators) manning the fcuk up and delivering the sh1t sandwiches properly.

It might be 'ok' in civvie strasse. But I'd like to think in the Forces it was considered terribley bad form if one wasn't informed through the chain of command. I'd also imagine, if I was higher up the food chain, I would be rather p1ssed off if the first I knew of one of my blokes being 'let go' was when they came to me with such an e-mail.
Which is exactly what has/did happen on that day. Gents we are not denying the fact that 'the email', was recieved and read by the
'38'. It is, as so rightly put earlier that it was done this way, that all the lesson's learnt over the years, was/has been swept to one side. If this is the way that they have treated the '38', then God knows how the poor buggers who will recieve the bad news in a month or so, (but on a larger scale) will be treated and there will be some on Ops at the time, that's for sure!
 
#19
Regardless of the spineless ways of informing personnel of a sacking, you have got to hand it to the Tories and the Limp Liberals they have done in 9 months what Hitler couldn't do in six years, completely destroy the Army,Navy and the Royal Air Force.
 
#20
Regardless of the spineless ways of informing personnel of a sacking, you have got to hand it to the Tories and the Limp Liberals they have done in 9 months what Hitler couldn't do in six years, completely destroy the Army,Navy and the Royal Air Force.
They are finishing what Thatcher Started.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
JT0475 Military History and Militaria 3

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top