Not required - go back to sleep
-
Welcome to the new B.I.R.D. Forum. Please be sure to read the "New Member / New Registered ? Please Read" thread in the Coffee Shop. This contains some important information. To become a full member ( £5.90 a year ) simply click on your user name near the top on the right I hope you enjoy the new site ................ Jaws ( John )
Should I Sign This?
- Thread starter Duck n Dive
- Start date
It is unlawful to kill someone except for certain circumstances, Police get a shit load of grief when they kill someone
I can break a law(s) if lawfully authorised
A license issued by an authorised (in law) authority specifies the circumstances/methods in which I can do so.
The airport refused, the company lost the tender, was withdrawn from several other tenders and not invited for any other tenders.
Stupid thing was that the airport only refuelled with AvTur.
Company folded a couple of years later.
Try being an HGV driver! We get pushed all the time and the planners (Tongue in cheek) in the office don't care if you break the law! After all it's not there driving licence!
A very real example:
In law (UK) all drones are classified as unmanned aircraft.
Acting to destroy one is legally no different to destroying a manned aircraft.
Should one become a problem I am permitted to use the equipment I'm provided with, to remove the problem if authorised by a police officer.
—----——------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's all a pretty sensitive issue as the licenses/authorisations apply anywhere within 13k of the airfield. It's not something that my employer (or other authorities for that matter) likes to broadcast particularly and I do understand why. But I'm not going to cover their asses by serving me up on a plate if it goes tits up!
I've just heard that the company legal department have been asked to remove tge clause.
There is another section, still not resolved, that says we would be personally liable in other ways.
But hopefully the main one is sorted.
There is another section, still not resolved, that says we would be personally liable in other ways.
But hopefully the main one is sorted.
Well I was a mug to believe my employer was being reasonable.
The new document only has the bit in brackets removed.
The rest remains.
Shop steward says he's doesn't understand the problem, he says:
Quote
"I don't have an issue with taking responsibility for my own actions which is what you are signing for."
I've tried pointing out that signing a legal indemnity goes a lot further than that.
I've basically said "get stuffed, I ain't signing that "
The new document only has the bit in brackets removed.
The rest remains.
Shop steward says he's doesn't understand the problem, he says:
Quote
"I don't have an issue with taking responsibility for my own actions which is what you are signing for."
I've tried pointing out that signing a legal indemnity goes a lot further than that.
I've basically said "get stuffed, I ain't signing that "
Making progress, slowly.
Letter has been amended to remove almost everything, but...... it still says we agree to be responsible if he gets prosecuted.
I have been talking to the regional union office and I'm expecting a call back.
Initially this was a problem as he'd classified all the documents as restricted (company restriction level 3 - 4 is max.).
He has now given permission for it all to be shared with the Union - I couldn't do so before.
Letter has been amended to remove almost everything, but...... it still says we agree to be responsible if he gets prosecuted.
I have been talking to the regional union office and I'm expecting a call back.
Initially this was a problem as he'd classified all the documents as restricted (company restriction level 3 - 4 is max.).
He has now given permission for it all to be shared with the Union - I couldn't do so before.
Forward to union gen secretary on an FYI basis.