Olympics Security bailed out by army..

paulmapp8306

Andy_L wrote: »

where there are such great catch-all phrases like "urgent work of national importance" which, lets face it, means whatever the Secretary of State says is important

Totally agree, however - the point I was trying to make is that the Olympics ISNT National is it - and the Secretary of State shouldnt be involved. Its a local London issue, and should be dealt with by the London Assembly and the Mayor.

Andy_L

paulmapp8306 wrote: »

Totally agree, however - the point I was trying to make is that the Olympics ISNT National is it - and the Secretary of State shouldnt be involved. Its a local London issue, and should be dealt with by the London Assembly and the Mayor.

Even if Olympic security isn't a national issue the London Assemby is still entitled to MACA as it is part of the Civil Authority/Community in the same way that previously the services have bailded out Local Govs with, eg flood defence

Andy_L

paulmapp8306 wrote: »

Why were then not put where the G4S guards SHOULD have been? and why are G4S not paying for it - or at least somewhere for them to sleep?

I belive one of the, many, problems with the G4S plan was that they wern't providing accomodation.

AIUI G4S are getting stung for the extra costs of deploying the troops (ie accom, food, transport)

DuckEggGingham

paulmapp8306 wrote: »

And this is what we put up with.

These guys got 12 hours notice they were going. They have just finished an 18 hour shift, and have 6 hours until the next one. Where are they billited?



Why were then not put where the G4S guards SHOULD have been? and why are G4S not paying for it - or at least somewhere for them to sleep?

I am sure its been mentioned before but a lot of these guys have also not long got back from 7 months in Afghan. Whilst they were away their families in homecoming briefs were given summer leave dates and encouraged to book holidays as a family holiday/time together is vital for decompression. All of a sudden now its not so vital? Weddings have had to be cancelled / postponed, people are out not only the emotional aspect but lots and lots of money. Also remembering that squaddies wont get an expense account to feed them. Families who are struggling in this climate as is will have to find the extra money so their other half has some money in his pocket whilst in London.

When in Afghan there is a few extra pounds in the pay packet due to the conditions they live in whilst away, I really cannot understand why the same is not being done for those lads sleeping on pushed together chairs and working all hours.

DuckEggGingham

Andy_L wrote: »

AIUI G4S are getting stung for the extra costs of deploying the troops (ie accom, food, transport)

When does that kick in?

Andy_L

DuckEggGingham wrote: »

When does that kick in?

I would suspect from when they deploy to London to when they recover back to thier barracks, that being when the extra costs are incurred

Andy_L

DuckEggGingham wrote: »

I am sure its been mentioned before but a lot of these guys have also not long got back from 7 months in Afghan. Whilst they were away their families in homecoming briefs were given summer leave dates and encouraged to book holidays as a family holiday/time together is vital for decompression. All of a sudden now its not so vital? Weddings have had to be cancelled / postponed, people are out not only the emotional aspect but lots and lots of money. Also remembering that squaddies wont get an expense account to feed them. Families who are struggling in this climate as is will have to find the extra money so their other half has some money in his pocket whilst in London.

When in Afghan there is a few extra pounds in the pay packet due to the conditions they live in whilst away, I really cannot understand why the same is not being done for those lads sleeping on pushed together chairs and working all hours.

It does surprise me why the army decided to send a unit who'd just returned form Afganistan rather than another unit, still the Army is notorious for !!!!!!ing its guys about far more than the Navy/RAF

My understanding of the labyrinthine confusion that is military allowances is that, if they have just returned from a tour, they will still be getting the separation allowance (£5-10/day? depending on how long they've been away)
They are on field conditions so are getting free food

DuckEggGingham

Andy_L wrote: »

I would suspect from when they deploy to London to when they recover back to thier barracks, that being when the extra costs are incurred

I am guessing it will be settled at a later date? As its not going to the boots on the ground now to help with accommodation and food and there has been no mention of it to those actually deployed there now doing the job. Or maybe its sporadic in kicking in now...

I also doubt, once this is over, that it will actually filter down to those having done the job to cover costs adequately that people are paying out of their own pockets at the moment. This is having such a knock on effect in so many ways.

DuckEggGingham

Andy_L wrote: »

It does surprise me why the army decided to send a unit who'd just returned form Afganistan rather than another unit, still the Army is notorious for !!!!!!ing its guys about far more than the Navy/RAF

My understanding of the labyrinthine confusion that is military allowances is that, if they have just returned from a tour, they will still be getting the separation allowance (£5-10/day? depending on how long they've been away)
They are on field conditions so are getting free food

I can assure you that they are not still getting £5 - £10 a day. An allowance will kick in after a certain amount of days of being away but its never that much though I will have to look out the actual official amounts, it goes by rank, situation etc. It is not enough to cover food, decent accommodation, communication home etc...But it does help. The main costs will be covered by the soldier themselves. The last I heard the free food was ration packs, adequate enough I guess but it hardly seems fair given the organisation of all this.

Andy_L

DuckEggGingham wrote: »

I am guessing it will be settled at a later date? As its not going to the boots on the ground now to help with accommodation and food and there has been no mention of it to those actually deployed there now doing the job. Or maybe its sporadic in kicking in now...

I also doubt, once this is over, that it will actually filter down to those having done the job to cover costs adequately that people are paying out of their own pockets at the moment. This is having such a knock on effect in so many ways.

If they are paying food & accomodation charges then someone has c0cked up their admin (or the're permenatly based in London anyway).