Minxie Posted April 30, 2008 Share Posted April 30, 2008 I do know of other companies (in the finance sector) who have compensated existing staff for extra travel expenses when relocating offices. What they normally do is pay the extra petrol (so if you drive from Castletown to Douglas they would only pay for however many extra miles it is to Jurby) for existing staff, and then any new staff who join are doing so knowing where the job is so they won't get any extra pay. Eventually with staff changes etc over a number of years the payments will fizzle out as people leave etc. Quite a few companies give their management petrol allowances so it's not that much different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerryMcCann Posted April 30, 2008 Share Posted April 30, 2008 I think the issue is that when they took jobs at the prison they knew they would have to travel to Douglas and that was accepted as a normal part of their daily commute and no extra should be paid for travel costs. The move to Jurby is a forced relocation. They have no choice but to accept it (other than quitting) and many will incur an extra cost for travel. I think it is fair that at least in the short term that they should be compensated for this extra cost Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted April 30, 2008 Share Posted April 30, 2008 What's good for the goose? Rushen MHK Quintin Gill, who is vice chairman on the public accounts cADVERTISEMENTommittee and chairman of the Office of Fair Trading, has claimed more money than anyone else, with £3,916.07. In defence of his claim, Mr Gill said: 'I apply myself to my duties whole heartedly and I am a full-time committed MHK.' Pamela Crowe MLC has claimed the next highest amount with £3,836.86. Glenfaba MHK David Anderson (also transport minister): £2,466.02. Castletown MHK Tony Brown (also chief minister): £2,104.92. Michael MHK David Cannan: £2,117.48. Clare Christian MLC: £2,256.27. Eddie Lowey MLC: £2,128.98. Ayre MHK Eddie Teare (health and social security minister): £2,350.70. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jap Posted April 30, 2008 Share Posted April 30, 2008 These prison officers look after the most violent and dangerous people that are on our Island. They have worked in absolutely abysmal conditions for years, nobody cared about that! Now they are having to add on an extra one and a half hours to their working day in order to travel to work - the new jail should not even be in Jurby -it should have gone to Braddan - no travelling difference there -and no millions of pounds wasted by telling everyone that Braddan was the place it was going -then the spineless MHK'S bottled out in case they did not get voted back in - no one cares if it goes out the back of beyond -but it cost millions of pounds in consultancy and planning fees to have the Braddan site knocked out! Have the taxpayers any idea how much more of their money is going to be used ferrying prisoners backwards and forwards to court and hospital appointments and so on? How much more is going to be spent on legal aid so their lawyers can travel out to Jurby and back to see their clients? The New jail was supposed to open in November 2007 - why the hold up ? It is not down to staff - Home Affairs has had years and years to sort out staff pay and conditions - they haven't - and now they want it to look like it is the staffs fault that the new jail is not open -when it isn't -it is theirs! The jail was handed over far too early - there is a massive amount of work to be done on the fixtures and fittings before it can be used. The prison staff have had no training on how to work all this super duper equpment that is there - and all the electrical equipment does not work! I know someone who worked on the new jail -they said it would be pushing it to be finished properly this side of christmas! These people are the unsung heros of the services - they deserve every penny they earn and more - and they should get it. They are contracted to work at Douglas - not Jurby - they all have families who have jobs in Douglas - it isn't just the prison staff themselves who are affected by this - but their families too. : Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeoneday Posted April 30, 2008 Share Posted April 30, 2008 These prison officers look after the most violent and dangerous people that are on our Island. They have worked in absolutely abysmal conditions for years, nobody cared about that! Now they are having to add on an extra one and a half hours to their working day in order to travel to work - the new jail should not even be in Jurby -it should have gone to Braddan - no travelling difference there -and no millions of pounds wasted by telling everyone that Braddan was the place it was going -then the spineless MHK'S bottled out in case they did not get voted back in - no one cares if it goes out the back of beyond -but it cost millions of pounds in consultancy and planning fees to have the Braddan site knocked out! Have the taxpayers any idea how much more of their money is going to be used ferrying prisoners backwards and forwards to court and hospital appointments and so on? How much more is going to be spent on legal aid so their lawyers can travel out to Jurby and back to see their clients? The New jail was supposed to open in November 2007 - why the hold up ? It is not down to staff - Home Affairs has had years and years to sort out staff pay and conditions - they haven't - and now they want it to look like it is the staffs fault that the new jail is not open -when it isn't -it is theirs! The jail was handed over far too early - there is a massive amount of work to be done on the fixtures and fittings before it can be used. The prison staff have had no training on how to work all this super duper equpment that is there - and all the electrical equipment does not work! I know someone who worked on the new jail -they said it would be pushing it to be finished properly this side of christmas! These people are the unsung heros of the services - they deserve every penny they earn and more - and they should get it. They are contracted to work at Douglas - not Jurby - they all have families who have jobs in Douglas - it isn't just the prison staff themselves who are affected by this - but their families too. : Thanks for that prison officer [please insert name] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparky Posted April 30, 2008 Share Posted April 30, 2008 I think the issue is that when they took jobs at the prison they knew they would have to travel to Douglas and that was accepted as a normal part of their daily commute and no extra should be paid for travel costs. The move to Jurby is a forced relocation. They have no choice but to accept it (other than quitting) and many will incur an extra cost for travel. I think it is fair that at least in the short term that they should be compensated for this extra cost I for one agree, how many privately owned business would move from Douglas to Jurby? You can bet any money you like that if they moved an office based Govt department from Douglas to Jurby there would be plenty of cash for travel, relocation etc. The alternative is to make sure that there is a bus available from all the major towns, that way you can argue there are alternate forms of transport. That's not likely to happen so mileage is the only option, after all they'll get taxed on this payment, so at least 18% comes straight back, the rest will be recouped in the petrol tax Over time these payments will phase out as new employees join knowing that their place of work is Jurby, anyway why has the DHA left it so long to try and resolve this obviously thorny issue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insomniac Posted April 30, 2008 Share Posted April 30, 2008 and if the general concencus had there way more public sector workers would be moved out of Douglas. If anyone here wouldn't expect extra pay to cover the cost of being made to work further from home they are mad. Who would be happy to see their employer land them with an extra £1000 or more a year fuel bill? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted April 30, 2008 Share Posted April 30, 2008 and if the general concencus had there way more public sector workers would be moved out of Douglas. If anyone here wouldn't expect extra pay to cover the cost of being made to work further from home they are mad. Who would be happy to see their employer land them with an extra £1000 or more a year fuel bill? there are lots of folks that don't live in douglas who work there ( the traffic jams in the morning show this ) do they all get money for travel?? unlikely!! why would anyone think they should get subsidised travel to go to work?? it is basically paying people more for doing the same job. if we all had our travel expenses paid for or subsidised it would be fair, but we don't. i suppose if you look at it the other way though, those who walk to work are effectively getting paid more as they don't have travel expenses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted April 30, 2008 Share Posted April 30, 2008 It's all down to their contract of employment. If they have signed up to be a "mobile" worker, as most public servants are, then there is no case to answer. "Mobile" in this case means they could be posted here, there and anywhere. As it is the IOM I should imagine it's not even mentioned. Which leaves an awful lot of open territory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Take Posted April 30, 2008 Share Posted April 30, 2008 and if the general concencus had there way more public sector workers would be moved out of Douglas. If anyone here wouldn't expect extra pay to cover the cost of being made to work further from home they are mad. Who would be happy to see their employer land them with an extra £1000 or more a year fuel bill? there are lots of folks that don't live in douglas who work there ( the traffic jams in the morning show this ) do they all get money for travel?? unlikely!! why would anyone think they should get subsidised travel to go to work?? it is basically paying people more for doing the same job. if we all had our travel expenses paid for or subsidised it would be fair, but we don't. i suppose if you look at it the other way though, those who walk to work are effectively getting paid more as they don't have travel expenses. I think you've missed the point. No-one, including the prison workers, expects to get travel money when they initially take a job. You accept a job offer knowing how far you have to travel and whether the salary is worth it. If you're then forced to travel to a relocated office and incur extra costs then the situation has changed. It isn't paying people more to do the same job - it's covering them for the increase in costs they incur by agreeing to stay on in that job after a relocation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pale Rider Posted April 30, 2008 Share Posted April 30, 2008 and if the general concencus had there way more public sector workers would be moved out of Douglas. If anyone here wouldn't expect extra pay to cover the cost of being made to work further from home they are mad. Who would be happy to see their employer land them with an extra £1000 or more a year fuel bill? there are lots of folks that don't live in douglas who work there ( the traffic jams in the morning show this ) do they all get money for travel?? unlikely!! why would anyone think they should get subsidised travel to go to work?? it is basically paying people more for doing the same job. if we all had our travel expenses paid for or subsidised it would be fair, but we don't. i suppose if you look at it the other way though, those who walk to work are effectively getting paid more as they don't have travel expenses. I think you've missed the point. No-one, including the prison workers, expects to get travel money when they initially take a job. You accept a job offer knowing how far you have to travel and whether the salary is worth it. If you're then forced to travel to a relocated office and incur extra costs then the situation has changed. It isn't paying people more to do the same job - it's covering them for the increase in costs they incur by agreeing to stay on in that job after a relocation. Exactly. I have been in this situation in the UK about 2 years ago. My company merged with another and relocated about 25 miles away from our old office. This meant staff had no choice but to move which increased our travelling costs and time. Had the job originally been in the new location I would never have applied because of the distance from home and fuel costs. Unfortunately the company had a get out clause. Because it was a merger, and not just a relocation they refused to pay. None of the staff who were forced to move work there now! About 10 years ago I was in a similar situation at a different company. This was a straightforward office relocation 13 miles away, we got a slight wage increase to cover extra fuel costs without even having to ask. As far as I know in the UK, a company has to offer staff some financial incentive if they relocate over a certain distance. I would assume rules will be similar on the island. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frog Posted April 30, 2008 Share Posted April 30, 2008 it's covering them for the increase in costs they incur by agreeing to stay on in that job after a relocation. As if they are going to leave their cushy little numbers for the sake of a few pence per mile. Let em go I say, see how long they last in the real world... 'Sir, he has more pens than me', 'his chair looks more comfy', 'you expect me to do that now? but i'm on my break'. I'd swap jobs... security (no pun intended) & paid to travel to work! These prison officers look after the most violent and dangerous people that are on our Island. Hmmmm, JAP, that's what prison guards tend to do and get paid very well for. You might wanna get used to that idea. Thanks for that prison officer [please insert name]... Brill. All sing... And I always get my way If I strike for higher pay When I show my card To the Scotland Yard This what I say. Oh you don't get me I'm part of the union You don't get me I'm part of the union You don't get me I'm part of the union Till the day I die, till the day I die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted April 30, 2008 Share Posted April 30, 2008 Little Miss Moffatt could learn some lessons in reasoned argument from her Dad. The interview on MR this morning sounded more like the prison officers were a bit hacked off at the attention being given to the new site and not them. 'Twas almost tantrum-like. Before we all get excited, what does their contract say? If compensation is due then they should get it, if it is not then anything the government is willing to pay as an ex gratia goodwill gesture should be received with good grace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dancer Posted April 30, 2008 Share Posted April 30, 2008 no tax payers money should be used for any government employee travelling to and from work. surely mileage allowance is mileage covered using own transport for official duties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted April 30, 2008 Share Posted April 30, 2008 Perhaps we should try moving a few government departments out to somewhere like Jurby - then see how well the Douglas-based civil servants accept it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.