Employment Status RAF Personnel Seconded to Industry.

Response to this request is long overdue. By law, under all circumstances, Ministry of Defence should have responded by now (details). You can complain by requesting an internal review.

Dear Ministry of Defence,

Could you please confirm the Employment Status of RAF Personnel Seconded to Industry on Project Salam.

1. Employed by the Company they are seconded to and bound by that companies terms and conditions of service, with the exception of the statutory regulations of the Armed forces pension scheme on secondment.
2. Remain fully Employed by the RAF and so eligible to claim RAF overseas allowances as long as they fit the criteria in JSP 752 and other related service publications.

Yours faithfully,

S Miles

CIO-FOI (MULTIUSER),

Dear Mr Miles,

Your request has been logged under our reference 2015/08082 and the target date for response is 14 Oct 2015

Yours sincerely

Information Rights team

Ministry of Defence

show quoted sections

Dear CIO-FOI (MULTIUSER),

There is no excuse for this delay, my previous request was to ascertain the validity of a document the MOD sates is 'in use', this request could be answered by quoting from that document. However, the point to note is that the MOD are not adhereing to that document.

Hence, the importance of a valid and timely response was paramount.

The MOD are once again flouting the law, this is unacceptable.

Yours sincerely,

Shaun J M Miles

Air-DRes Sec-ParliBusiness (MULTIUSER),

1 Attachment

Dear Mr Miles,

 

Please find attached a response to your recent Freedom of Information
request.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Air Director Resources Secretariat

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                                                                                                                                                        

Dear Air-DRes Sec-ParliBusiness (MULTIUSER),

The questions:

1. Employed by the Company they are seconded to and bound by that
companies terms and conditions of service, with the exception of
the statutory regulations of the Armed forces pension scheme on
secondment.
2. Remain fully Employed by the RAF and so eligible to claim RAF
overseas allowances as long as they fit the criteria in JSP 752 and
other related service publications.

Have never been requested in this format therefore you have no right to reject my request, previous responses on secondee employment status have been responded to incorrectly, you may quote previous responses as many times as you like, this does not validate the content.

You have described my responses as vexatious, this seems to be an excuse by the MOD in their failure to answer the questions and provide a policy document to verify their view on the matter, while they have admitted that the document that contradicts their previous response is 'in use'.

Anyone with a basic understanding of the English language can not misinterpret the content of the 1986 agreement which states that secondees are to be regarded as "employees".

Please respond correctly to my request and provide a valid policy document to verify your answer, as I have a valid MOD policy document to refute your previous answers.

Your are obliged by LAW to respond to this request and have a duty of care to ensure to adhere to current MOD policy, you are also obliged under the armed forces covenant to assist ex-serving members in any way you can.

I request an immediate review and will be forwarding this case to the ICO for thier consideration.

Yours sincerely,

Shaun J M Miles

ISS Des-CMI-IR Compliance1-KIM(Bennett, Jory Mr),

1 Attachment

  • Attachment

    20151123 Rev Miles Employment status of RAF Personnel on Project Salam Rev final resp.pdf

    91K Download View as HTML

PSA

 

MOD Information Rights Compliance Team

Dear Ministry of Defence,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request another internal review of Ministry of Defence's handling of my FOI request 'Employment Status RAF Personnel Seconded to Industry.'.

You have said that you have conducted an internal review, you have accused my request for information to be vexatious, you have failed to respond in the correct manner and timescales, you have used the excuse of only being 1 day late as a reason in breaking the law, I'm afraid your responses and internal reviews are biased and lack moral content.

I request a further internal review and the correct response to the information I have requested, just labeling a request vexatious, is not an excuse for you to flout the law.

This whole matter has been referred to the ICO for investigation.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/e...

Yours faithfully,

Shaun J M Miles

CIO-FOI-IR (MULTIUSER),

Dear Mr Miles,

If you remain dissatisfied with the outcome of the internal review your only option is to make a complaint to the Information Commissioner, whose details we have already provided.

Yours sincerely,

MOD Information Complaints Team

Dear CIO-FOI-IR (MULTIUSER),

Thank you for your reply, a complaint was already made to the ICO on 4th December 15 (Case reference number: FS50592055 MoD ref: FOI2015/05451) and has been assigned a caseworker.

Yours sincerely,

Shaun J M Miles

CIO-FOI-IR (MULTIUSER),

Dear Mr Miles,

 

If you remain dissatisfied with the outcome of the internal review your
only option is to make a complaint to the Information Commissioner, whose
details we have already provided.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

MOD Information Complaints Team