Polytetrafluoroethylene
Mr_S_Mayoh-Smith_v_The_Ministry_of_Defence_-__3307354_-_2018_Judgment_and_Reserved_Reasons.pdf
285.94 KB
Polytetrafluoroethylene
Who let Teflon back in here
As an employment judge you should have been able to identify the case even with the most basic level of legal education as to what those abbreviations refer to, let alone the year of the case.
It’s pretty much law 101 for anyone who is in the profession!
I’m satisfied with my understanding of the relevant tests for employee status, as are the EAT incidentally. But I’ll take on board your comments and be sure to brush up.
Well spell it out for the rest of us following along at home? I’ve got no clue what the hell you’re on about at all. The other people here have linked to direct cases that I’ve read through. You’re just saying things with no proof.
@Baldrick is still a barrister specialising in Employment not a judge (he’s sensible as he’s likely to make much more money than the judiciary out of the changes Labour are promising to bring in), but you’ve not helped yourself by you getting the wrong year in your citation.
Anyway, have fun everyone.
I assume the case you are referring to is
Ministry of pensions vs Ready Mixed concrete
I reference you my earlier answer where it has been ruled in court that case does not apply.
I’ve literally never seen anyone reduce Ready Mix Concrete to RMC, also, you were 14 years out in the citation, so no, I didn’t realise that’s what you meant.
And it doesn’t apply.
But, please, please, if you are so much cleverer than all of us, prove us wrong with this thing called evidence.
Or, kindly leave and take your nonsense with you.
And back on topic, I saw from @WhiskeyNovember that no one contacted him whilst NEP. I can confirm that this is still what seems to happen when on ELA (which I understand was introduced as a more friendly alternative to NEP). No contact on the run up to, or after the return date in breach of the process in the ACPs, so clearly not interested in retaining CFAVs.
Additionally no acknowledgement of my resignation so that I still have access to sensitive cadet and staff details if I choose to log into my account.
Good old data protection.
Please provide full reference for this case or link to full judgment.
Thank you
Please provide full reference for this case or link to full judgment.
You’re clearly not even reading this thread whilst arguing as @Chief_Tech was directly referring to a post made before (in reply to you…):
Literally the first decision on the ET judgments website if you search for Air Cadets, is a 2019 decision where a VR(T) officer claimed they were an employee, and lost. Mr S Mayoh Smith v The Ministry of Defence: 3307354/2018 - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
Actually quite right. I did get the year wrong for which I apologise, as I was thinking or something else but honestly, anyone who has practiced in the last 30 years would know what I’m referencing!
Please provide full reference for this case or link to full judgment.
As requested
285.94 KB
Paragraph 17 under conclusions
Please provide full reference for this case or link to full judgment
I just used your friend Google. I searched “this tribunal reaches the same conclusions as the EAT did in breakell” and it was the first result. So even if you hadn’t already been provided the link then you’d have easily been able to find it
I’m struggling to access my own service record, you aren’t allowed to access Volunteer Portal, or Units once suspended, and despite doing ALL of my mandatory training. (JFC how long is heat injuries?) I’ve not been reinstated whilst I await the transfer process to kick in.
Noone from Wing has spoken to me either.
that no one contacted him whilst NEP. I can confirm that this is still what seems to happen when on ELA (which I understand was introduced as a more friendly alternative to NEP
EL/LOA was always there it just wasn’t popularised. Default position people pushed was the NEP side which is always been a deferred resignation.
People should have done contact particular in the final 6 months to start the return paperwork but in short order it’s designed that if a volunteer disappears we can resign them off the books.
Because if this NEP you come off systems.
Leave of absence is a semi informal welfare thing to exempt uniform staff from the 12 hour rule
It’s just ELA now I’m pretty sure?
But unsurprising to hear once again that the contact is non-existent. When I stopped attending for personal reasons for a few months, the first contact I had was a suspension letter in the post! Not even a phone call. And the letter was essentially “Start attending or we’ll kick you out”.
Ah yes, retention…
Who let Teflon back in here
Yet I can’t get rid of people who aren’t attending, even though I’ve received their resignation form and send it on!