shocking treatment of aa staff

pitkin2020

So the OP works for the AA (just a guess) and i would say the OP has a gripe over the working conditions maybe?? Well if that is the case leave and get another job..............

redped

I still don't see what the OP's issue is. A company wants/needs to downsize, and is offering its staff a nice lump sum to leave. This is happening right across most sectors in the country, and happened to me 5 years ago - I took the money and moved on with my life. As pitkin says, it just sounds like the OP has a personal gripe about the AA - if so, take the money and move on. BTW, is it £18K, or 18K euros, as the OP is talking about job losses in the Republic of Ireland? If euros, then that's just under £16K.

Hintza

OP apparently works for/with/on jaguar landrover (hence user name) but might have worked for the AA/RAC in the past.

peter_the_piper

Considering the financial problems in Ireland and the fact more cars are reliable/less affordable its not surprising that 12 in the whole of the country are being let go.

jlrtech

peter_the_piper wrote: »

Still says its in Ireland doesn't it? Are there any in the UK?

yes for the second time 6 from each team in the uk as well

pitkin2020 wrote: »

So the OP works for the AA (just a guess) and i would say the OP has a gripe over the working conditions maybe?? Well if that is the case leave and get another job..............

i work for jag/landrover assistance i do have a gripe with the aa . did you know that aa patrols are pulled from normal customers to jaguar /landrover customers for silly things like dropping there cars off for a service or showing them how to use functions on there new cars ! . my wife was broken down and the patrol was diverted to a landrover job because they could not get the tv screens to work :eek: :mad: . my wife and child were left at the road side for 4 hours ! would you be happy paying for this service

redped wrote: »

is it £18K, or 18K euros, as the OP is talking about job losses in the Republic of Ireland? If euros, then that's just under £16K.

i am talking about ireland and the uk for gods sake go onto that aa forum and look at what the patrols are saying it will lead to long delays on the road side for paying customers

redped

jlrtech wrote: »

yes for the second time 6 from each team in the uk as well

Ok, you'll have to accept that most of use aren't as knowledgeable as you about the AA, so I have no idea how many are currently in a team, and what impact losing 6 people will have. Oh, and if this is the second time you've mentioned 6 from each team, where was the first time you mentioned it? First it was 12 in the RoI and 400 patrols from the UK, now it's 6 from each team - your numbers keep changing!

i am talking about ireland and the uk for gods sake go onto that aa forum and look at what the patrols are saying it will lead to long delays on the road side for paying customers

As I've already asked, is the 18K stering or euros? One of your gripes appears to be the level of pay-off, so it does make a difference to your argument if you're talking about £18K or less than £16K (i.e. 18K in euros).

I had a quick look at the AA forum, but I'm not going to trawl through every post trying to find the source of your claims.

peter_the_piper

I suppose the increase in usage of other "get you home services", potential sell off and current financial situation all have a bearing. I expect when the economy picks up here and in Ireland then they will take staff on again. That's a very poor forum IMHO,takes ages to work through.

pitkin2020

jlrtech wrote: »

yes for the second time 6 from each team in the uk as well





i work for jag/landrover assistance i do have a gripe with the aa . did you know that aa patrols are pulled from normal customers to jaguar /landrover customers for silly things like dropping there cars off for a service or showing them how to use functions on there new cars ! . my wife was broken down and the patrol was diverted to a landrover job because they could not get the tv screens to work :eek: :mad: . my wife and child were left at the road side for 4 hours ! would you be happy paying for this service





i am talking about ireland and the uk for gods sake go onto that aa forum and look at what the patrols are saying it will lead to long delays on the road side for paying customers

So are you saying the AA turned up to your wife but before completing the job went off to fix a tv in a landrover?

Or are you saying your wife was waiting at the side road for hours and no one turned up and the AA told you wife over the phone they were off fixing a TV??

I'd be extremely surprised if AA patrols were called in to take a landrover for a service, especially on a frequent basis.

jlrtech

http://www.gmb.org.uk/newsroom/latest_news/aa_guilty_of_disability_discri.aspx




AA FOUND GUILTY OF DISCRIMINATION AGAINST DIABETIC GMB MEMBER IT TRIED TO "PERFORMANCE MANAGE" OUT OF HIS PATROL JOB

GMB member was not intimidated and his successful claim shows that there is an alternative to being "performance managed" out the door for the 450 AA staff across the country currently facing this prospect

An Employment Tribunal, sitting in Exeter, has found that the AA is guilty of discrimination against a disabled employee Paul Bailey who AA tried to ""performance manage" out of his AA patrol job. The Employment Tribunal unanimously held that Mr. Bailey had been subjected by AA to direct disability discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, harassment and a failure to make reasonable adjustments because of his disability.

Earlier this month GMB, the union for staff in AA, said that up to 450 AA workers across Britain have been targeted by AA managers with "a take it or leave it" offer of £18,000 to leave their jobs in five days of face being "performance managed" out the door. This is a repeat of what happened in 2006 when over 3,000 were pushed out the door by the private equity owners Permira and CVC. See notes to editors below. GMB believe that the AA is seeking to get rid of around 450 skilled patrol staff and replace some of them with less skilled workers on lower pay and conditions. AA admitted that they plan to performance manage 200 staff out the door.

Paul Bailey, a GMB member, was a top 100 patrol within the AA and started working for the AA in 1998. He was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes in June 2009 following which he was advised to take a more measured approach to his work. His performance subsequently dropped, although he remained an average performer within the company.

In the case of Mr. Bailey, in October 2010, the AA sent out a training support patrol with Mr. Bailey for 2 weeks. The Tribunal found that it had never happened before that an employee had been accompanied by a training patrol for a period of 2 weeks and that such accompaniment was generally for 1 day or, if there were concerns about performance, 2 days. The Tribunal held that Mr. Bailey was only being subjected to the assessment because his performance had dropped because of his diabetes. Moreover, the Tribunal held that Mr. Bailey's performance was not so bad as to merit a performance review as his performance was average. Moreover, neither Mr. Bailey nor the training support patrols were told what to expect or what the purpose of the accompaniment was meant to be. Mr. Bailey also received no feedback following the accompaniment. Mr. Bailey found the accompaniment very stressful as he believed the training support patrol was there to increase his speed. He also found it difficult to take rest breaks while the training support patrol was in the cab. Moreover, Mr. Bailey was distressed when his line manager, Jason Morrison, called the training support patrol and spoke with him about Mr. Bailey while Mr. Bailey was present.

Further, in December 2010, Jason Morrison offered Mr. Bailey three months' salary to leave saying that the alternative would be to be placed on an improvement plan, which Mr. Bailey was told he wouldn't pass. When Mr. Bailey refused to leave he was subjected to a technical assessment for poor performers. The forms relating to the technical assessment indicated that a person who did not do well could be dismissed. Mr. Bailey attended the technical assessment and was embarrassed to see that another person being assessed was someone who was at the bottom of his team. Mr. Bailey passed the technical assessment and acknowledged at the Tribunal hearing that his performance had dropped so that he was no longer a top 100 performer but insisted that he was not now a poor performer. Rather, he stated that he was still an average performer with over 1000 employees whose performance was beneath his own.

Mr. Morrison further told Mr. Bailey that there was another patrol with type 1 diabetes and that therefore Mr. Bailey should not have a problem, although Mr. Morrison later admitted that he did not know who the other patrol was.

He also told Mr. Bailey that other patrols were paid the same amount of money for doing twice as much work. Again Mr. Bailey complained that there were hundreds of patrols who were not disabled, who did a lot less work than him but who were not being subjected to similar treatment.

Mr. Morrison also told Mr. Bailey that if he had an accident at work, that Mr. Morrison could be liable for corporate manslaughter and sent to jail.

Paul Grafton GMB Regional Officer who supported the claim on behalf of Mr. Bailey said "The Employment Tribunal unanimously held that Mr. Bailey had been subjected by AA to direct disability discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, harassment and a failure to make reasonable adjustments because of his disability.

The outcome for Mr. Bailey is clearly a huge step forward to recognizing diabetes within the workplace and forcing employers to act appropriately.

Mr. Bailey refused to bow to the intimidation and turned to his union GMB who supported him when he filed his successful claim. This should show other staff at AA that there is an alternative to being "performance managed" out the door. Up to 450 AA staff across the country are currently facing this prospect.

Sadly the AA continues to use huge financial resources ifrom its private equity owned backers and intimidatory techniques to push staff out the back door with a cheap financial offer because they suffer a disability. AA has pushing people out the door for years and it is happening now at AA with the approval of the in-house staff association"'

Mr. Bailey, following receipt of the judgment, said ' I feel a massive sense of relief as this whole process has had a damaging effect on my health and my life. I always felt confident of a positive result and would like to thank the GMB and their excellent legal team for their unwavering support during a very difficult time."

End

Notes to Editors

Following the private equity takeover of AA GMB members who were sacked AA disabled staff protested throughout 2006 and 2007 to say that AA profits were increased by sackings, prices rises and reduction in service to customers, and that AA had been asset stripped and burdened with debts as follows:-

• In September 2007 the private equity owners took £300 million out of the AA having owned it for less than 3 years. The five top people at owners CVC were paid £50 million each for a year's work. City sources say the amount asset stripped was far higher.

• The AA has been left saddled with debts of £4.8 billion. Debt is £400,000 per employee. Interest on this debt is £30,000 per year per employee, more than double the pay of call centre staff.

• 3,400 of the 10,000 employees were in sacked between 2005/ 2007 and AA patrols were forced to work compulsory overtime.

• GMB was derecognized by AA HR professionals who were key to setting up a staff association that assisted them in the greatest act of corporate bullying ever seen in the UK.

• Disabled and sick staff was targeted for the sack in "one to one" meetings. Each person was given the choice of either accepting £18,000 to leave quietly without complaint or be "performance managed" out the door with nothing. GMB has won employment tribunal cases for unfair dismissals at AA during the restructuring.

• Wages for call centre staff in Newcastle upon Tyne, Manchester, Birmingham and Cardiff were cut and staff are subjected to total surveillance.

• Prices for many customers were also raised.

• AA fell from first to third for response times to customers after the takeover by private equity. Night patrols were withdrawn after seventy years.

• In October 2007 it was reported that an AA member stranded in the Yorkshire Dales for 10 hours had to be rescued by his wife travelling from Southampton before the AA could get to him. The AA has written to him to say "It is as a direct result of your experience that we are fully engaged in the process of changing our (award winning) working methods to address our failings."

• In October 2007 GMB wrote to Department of Transport complaining the AA is breaking the law failing to comply with the tachographs and drivers hour's regulations for its VRS recovery vehicles.

:beer:

rodenal

Companies have to review their position all the time

People lose their jobs all the time

£18k is a substantial pay off and should give these people a decent buffer to find a new job

If I don't think i'm being paid enough - i'll find another job

If I don't like the working conditions - I'll find another job

If I don't like the company - I'll find another job.

I wont run to some union who will then try to have my employer justify why they need x amount less staff. These things happen, deal with it and move on.

If you don't like the level of service you or your wife received from the AA, change provider, log a complaint and move on.