Being a unite member myself wouldn’t they only provide rep cover for matters within my branch (Ie work)? Legal services might be different but they would need to agree to take on any case but that is a different level than disciplinary representation.
Unions do provide representation even if they haven’t a recognition agreement, look at Ryanair. The CFAVs need to get together and speak to a union.
1 Like
I feel that people are being somewhat optimistic about the level of support that a trade union will offer in these circumstances. Whilst unions are under an obligation to support you in the workplace (however read the T&Cs carefully on that) they are highly unlikely to wish to become formally involved in what could be regarded as peripheral matters. Even when the legal assistance offered extends beyond the normal employment it is likely to be discretionary and subject to limits.
Unison’s statement regarding legal services is a case in point:
Legal services for you at work and your family at home
Our legal support includes free help with most work problems that you may have. This can either be from our specialist in-house lawyers and a team of trade union solicitors that are on hand to help, or by local union reps, branches and officers in the UK. But our help doesn’t just stop when you leave work. We offer free initial legal advice on any matter not related to work, plus a range of other legal help for you and your family. To be eligible for our legal assistance scheme you must have been a member for at least four weeks prior to the incident that led you to seek this help. You must also be up to date with your subscriptions. **Legal help is provided at the discretion of the union’s national executive counci**l.
I have highlighted the crucial sections of text, as ever the devil is in the detail. You will find that all unions have similar stipulations in their rules, no one makes open ended commitments.
So, you will probably be able to access informal advice from one of your union’s paid employees and you may get an short consultation with a member of the legal department. Other than that, you will in all probability be on your own.
exmpa
All sensible words … but if several thousand new members were the consequence of a union taking interest, then you might get past the informal advice stage. (Obviously can’t be promised but …)
1 Like
I have heard people talking about joining a union outside the forum. If you are joining as an RAFAC member specifically (not for your day job), would you get better support? Maybe someone should approach some unions and see what the feeling is. More members = more subs for the union.
TBH if it was possible to get this up and running, any support would be better than what people currently get when the vultures are circling.
The CoC is self serving even within the ATC ranks as well any Air Cadet volunteer support being about as potent as a eunuch.
Something like this would like with all unions be outside the organisation you would expect fairer treatment , rather than the current internal kangaroo court system. It would then require the ATC to get all their ducks in a row.
Im a GMB Rep I ll make some enqs and see what my regional Office think.However dont forget theres nothing stopping you being a member of any union.Its your legal right.As regards HQAC any union would need a recognition agreement.
Is anybody who is accused ofsomething allowed a representative from outside the ACO, which seems fair as if they are from inside, you could never quite trust them to represent your interests impartially.
At a courts martial the acccused can engage civilian council to represent them and there are solicitors who are experienced at doing that. So what is the problem with a civilian union representative playing the role of the defence council at a meeting.
Just imagine the consternation if a CFAV walked in with a civilian solicitor for an interview, there is no requirement to disclose their representative before the interview.
As CFAV are not covered by military law I couldnt see any problem with engaging a legal eagle to fight your corner.Lets face it no one in the organisation will.
Even if you are a regular serviceperson, you are allowed to engage civilian legal representation.
You should be … this is a civilian operation which should apply good practice at least to the extent that the accused can receive standard legal process and rights.
Trouble is … you are not dealing with a legal entity so you would end up with who knows how many twist and turns, followed by formalities with the MOD (as the legal entity responsible for running the youth organisation) which would be like fighting an anaconda under quicksand.
You can be sure that ATC-HQ will do everything to avoid third-party representation and will do everything to avoid any recognition that they must behave themselves in regard to volunteers. Left to their own devices … they are simply incapable.
1 Like
I have heard that when the question was raised about representation at a hearing, and that a solicitor (family member) was suggested as a possible witness, it came back that a representative or witness could attend but it had to be someone who was a current member of the ACO.
I have been unable to find reference to that assertion in any ACP, even where some aspects of ACO administration were never within scope of the Armed Forces Act.
So would this be denial of suitable representation to ensure that the ACO were successful where they were not following procedure specified in defence council regulations?
This whole issue is important and should not be trivialised, specifically as things seem to be moving away from what we have all worked with.
Is every one being sold a pig in a poke, except of course there appears no choice.
And does everyone have the ACMB to thank for that?
1 Like
If members of the regular forces can have civilian representation at a courts martial why should the ACO be any different?
1 Like
C’os you can’t guarantee an HQ win if normal process is observed.
2 Likes
While I have no knowledge whatsoever of due process it would seem to me that natural justice would indicate that as adult volunteers are no longer subject to military law and that any rules and regulations set out by the RAFAC would need to be lawful, then the only way to test them would be through a system of law governed in the civil sector. In such a system an individual is entitled to representation with decisions made being used as precedent in future similar cases. Such a system is open to external scrutiny. I can’t see that being a problem !!
2 Likes
I don’t think any investigations that are undertaken are deemed to be a ‘WIN’ they are often completing investigations to help protect our CFAVs or Cadets.
If the person being interviewed had read the ACP themselves then they would understand the procedure and be able to quote it back to the person saying they can’t have a friend with them. Or their AO should have been able to help them with this.
But getting access to BADER is difficult if you do not have a named account and impossible as a cadet.
No it isn’t.
1 Like
So how do cadets get to look at ACP20?
A friend of mine (an OC) was suspended last year, because a it was suspected a member of staff on his sqn did not carry out an activity in line with the current guidance.
He was suspended for a number of months, before the investigation was dropped (with no evidence of any wrongdoing). The day before he received his suspension letter, his bader accounts were suspended. His letter said he could only communicate with his AO about the matter, yet all of the people he requested to be his AO were considered “not suitable” (including me). The AO that was finally appointed was not issued TORs, and all communications had to be run past the WSO that suspended him in the first place…
The point being, that if he’d played by the rules, then he would have no access to the disciplinary guidelines, and no idea what the correct process is. Luckily “a friend” provided him with copies of all of the relevant manuals he needed to fight his corner…
6 Likes