NOTES OF MEETING HELD 22 FEBRUARY 2006

ON HEALTH AND SAFETY ON USAF BASES AND OUTSOURCING OF UK WORKERS BY USAF

Present

Richard Hatfield                          Personnel Director MoD

G Jasper                                    DS&C AD Health and Safety Policy

Peter Allenson                            MoD Industrial Trades Union

Laurence Faircloth                      Amicus TU

Nick White                                 Amicus TU

Peter Berry                                Secretary CCSU

 

HEALTH AND SAFETY

 

The Trades Union still had reservations over the placing of UK workers under the American “Mishap Programme” as a safety management system. They were not convinced that the consultation document proposed the right option.

 

The Personnel Director explained that The MoD had considered all the arguments that the TU had raised, and had looked at the alternative options that the Trades Union had proposed. The situation required action to improve the situation and it was not viable for MoD as an employer to do nothing.

 

It was considered that the most viable option was the one proposed in the consultation document to place the UK workers associated with the Americans under the USAF Health and Safety Management System. This matter would be reviewed and closely monitored and if necessary changes would be made. This was the course of action MoD would take.

 

It was accepted that the Trades Union disagreed with the approach to be taken, but MoD requested that the Trades Union and their members work together with MoD and USAF officers to make the proposals viable and improve safety on the USAF bases.

 

It was agreed that the Trades Union would be given, prior to issue, sight for comment on the letters that would introduce the change to the American safety management system to the US and UK managers

 

OUTSOURCING ON USAF BASES

 

The Personnel Director stated that the MOD agreements in place with the Americans and the legal requirements in the UK protected the rights of UK workers.  Without a specific issue that could be taken up directly with the Americans, the issue was largely hypothetical and it was difficult to see what more could be done to provide reassurance.  The issues that arose in the two previous cases had been raised with the Americans and it has been made clear to them that they need to take TUPE legislation into account.

 

The Trades Unions are very concerned that no guarantee could be obtained on this point from the Americans despite repeated requests. They asked whether MoD would be prepared to underwrite any pension costs.  The Personnel Director said that would not be possible, not least because it would artificially reduce the costs to the USVF of outsourcing options and disadvantage in-house options.

 

The Personnel Director proposed that the MoD should write both to the US military authorities and to the Embassy emphasising that the existing Agreement with the US forces contained an undertaking that MoD employees working for the USVF should be treated on the same basis as other MoD employees and stating clearly that this required employees transferring to a contractor to be offered a pension equivalent to that available under PSCPS. Copies of the letters will be made available to the Trades Unions

 

 

 

 

G Jasper

OHS-AD

88328 MB.