British Gas and personal Gas safe registration

[jumbo55]

yes and just remember heatingman, its sarf london not sarth london. get it right

 

[snb]

I have the benefit of being qualified in employment law.

There have been many changes over the last few years and the procedure for sacking (termination of contract) will normally take at least 7 working days but less than 21 days.

Due to the restrictive practices act it BG cannot enforce that no-one can have GSR on their own or carry out work of a similar nature. But they could sack them if they were to carry out any work for a person who previously used BG. This would be considered working in competition. The reason in these cases that is normally used is lack of trust. (purely because it requires no detailed explantion of what has caused this lack of trust).

When i spoke to a BG employee on friday night he said that quite a few had been sacked but he was sure it was for using company stock and equipment.

On another note BG are so short of work that now all service engineers have to put leaflets through the neighbours either side of each job and opposite. And if they are caught not doing so will sacked for not carry out company instructions!!!

 

[scatmanjohn]

On another note BG are so short of work that now all service engineers have to put leaflets through the neighbours either side of each job and opposite. And if they are caught not doing so will sacked for not carry out company instructions!!!

Thats a lie

 

[jumbo55]

well that makes complete sense snb. glad to have a professional outlook, my feeling and that of my friend is that bg have lost a lot of customers , they have left bg because of the credit crunch, after all if you havent had to call an engineer out for several years, you may think you can economise by just paying an engineer if things go wrong.

the engineers are being put under pressure to sell more, thats always been the bg way, bloody carbon monoxide detectors for twice the price you can get them in shops, but according to my mate who was only sacked 2 weeks ago, i dont know about leafletting adjacent properties, but they were expected to leave upgrade quotes with all the customers they visited,( this is the latest gimmick) its not that the engineers will, its designed to put pressure on them to raise revenue. this performance target an engineer has to meet, works against bg not for it, leaving a lot of customers dissatisfied with a hurried and not a particularly good service, i could have got my target performance up but not without compromising safety, so i left. that was 5 years ago and i have not regretted it, i dont earn the money i did, but i can live with myself and am a happier person.[/url]

 

[SoonToBeRich]

I have the benefit of being qualified in employment law.

That's also a lie.

 

[heatingman]

No BG engineers have been sacked for doing private work or holding corgi/gsr, these have just been their downfall. They have been dismissed for theft, misuse of company equipment, working in competition or some other gross mis-conduct charge. If two guys get caught and only use one of the vans, the one whose van it is will def get the chop, the other if lucky will get a written warning. Unless they both get caught at the time doing the job.

 

[jumbo55]

2 guys were sacked on one patch in north london, they were not caught working on any job, the charge was for working in competition with bg, even though bg could not prove this, they said they dont have to, i reckon snb got it right, they have been careful to cover themselves on this and i think they expect to be challenged....this has been said 5 or 6 times now.
i know its a long thread but please check whats already been written.

 

[nickso]

I have the benefit of being qualified in employment law.

and those qualifications are what exactly?

There have been many changes over the last few years and the procedure for sacking (termination of contract) will normally take at least 7 working days but less than 21 days.

is that within BG or in general?

Due to the restrictive practices act it BG cannot enforce that no-one can have GSR on their own or carry out work of a similar nature

please re-state this so it makes sense

But they could sack them if they were to carry out any work for a person who previously used BG. This would be considered working in competition.

the whole point of BG's stance is that anyone holding a seperate GS registration is automatically in competition with BG as they must be using the registration for non BG work. if they are not using it in competition then they would have no problem with relinquishing it.

When i spoke to a BG employee on friday night he said that quite a few had been sacked but he was sure it was for using company stock and equipment.

that is even harder to prove than the employee simply working outside BG. the stock control at BG is so simple to circumvent its not funny.

On another note BG are so short of work that now all service engineers have to put leaflets through the neighbours either side of each job and opposite. And if they are caught not doing so will sacked for not carry out company instructions!!!

this is quite simply *******s. what is your source for this?

 

[Agile]

No BG engineers have been sacked for doing private work or holding corgi/gsr, these have just been their downfall. They have been dismissed for theft, misuse of company equipment, working in competition or some other gross mis-conduct charge.

Any example of "gross misconduct" is potentially an instant dismissal which involves being escorted out of the building in the case of an office job.

In the BBC the mostly cited possibility was assulting another employee but more recently was probably more likely to be acting against the business interests of the BBC by discussing contract prices with competitors etc.

Tony

 

[nickso]

well that makes complete sense snb. glad to have a professional outlook

a major assumption without fact.

my feeling and that of my friend is that bg have lost a lot of customers , they have left bg because of the credit crunch,

they may well have lost a lot of customers to the "credit crunch". probably no more than the average company have though. lets face it, in this bright and sunny isle, heating repair demand is not likely to diminish much, BG as current market leaders are likely to stay as such.

the engineers are being put under pressure to sell more, thats always been the bg way

i cant deny this needs to be stamped out.

bloody carbon monoxide detectors for twice the price you can get them in shops

the price has been reduced. to what i dont know as i dont sell them. £21 rings a bell.

i dont know about leafletting adjacent properties

you are right, you dont know. pure fantasy.

but they were expected to leave upgrade quotes with all the customers they visited

probably untrue but it depends on the TSM. what you are required to do is leave a quote with any customer who has a problem not covered by contract. whether or not some engineers make up problems is another issue.

its designed to put pressure on them to raise revenue. this performance target an engineer has to meet, works against bg not for it, leaving a lot of customers dissatisfied with a hurried and not a particularly good service

that depends on the engineers own personal ability and moral responsibilty. i dont do it and most round my way dont either. there are a few who do and i feel they need to be booted. the fact that BG currently reward you more for "selling" than repairing is a major problem for me and will ultimately make me leave BG unless they redress the balance more towards rewards for repairs.

 

[Agile]

Its quite reasonable, and in my view normal, for any company to expect all their employees to have the interests of the company at the forefront.

Expanding the business of the company is totally normal. For the many BG employees with BG shares thats also in their own interests as well.

As long as its operated in an honest way, I dont see any problem at all with that.

Pretending that spare parts are no longer available when they clearly are is NOT being honest and it seems a lot of BG employees do engage with that scam.

Tony

 

[nickso]

Its quite reasonable, and in my view normal, for any company to expect all their employees to have the interests of the company at the forefront.

Expanding the business of the company is totally normal. For the many BG employees with BG shares thats also in their own interests as well.

As long as its operated in an honest way, I dont see any problem at all with that.

Pretending that spare parts are no longer available when they clearly are is NOT being honest and it seems a lot of BG employees do engage with that scam.

Tony

i shall have to copy this post for future use when you forget what you have just said glazier.

the biggest problem with the "no parts but there are parts ""scam"" is the perception by many engineers that they dont have time to fit them. in some cases this is true but there are a lot of ways around it that the moaners either dont understand or simply wont use on principal. the BG "time" system is there to be abused to its fullest.

my own view is to extract the maximum urine from the system until a pen pusher phones you to tell you to stop. after a few weeks you continue to take the michael but in a smaller volume until you find the level of pi ssta king that they will accept.

 

[snb]

I have the benefit of being qualified in employment law.

That's also a lie.

Well that's funny.

Because when i gained my cert in employment relations,law and practice. which took 3 years to gain it was meant to mean that i was qualified.

 

[snb]

Any example of "gross misconduct" is potentially an instant dismissal which involves being escorted out of the building in the case of an office job.

Tony[/quote]

Any employee considered to have committed an act of gross misconduct will have to be suspended in the 1st case whilst it is investigated.

It only when the investigatory/disciplinary hearing is carried out that after this meeting that the outcome can then be confirmed as gross misconduct.

If these steps are not taken then the employee has good grounds for an unfair dismissal case.

 

[scatmanjohn]

I have the benefit of being qualified in employment law.

That's also a lie.

Well that's funny.

Because when i gained my cert in employment relations,law and practice. which took 3 years to gain it was meant to mean that i was qualified.

That may not be a lie (no one on here can prove otherwise)

But what about the leaflet story?

Is that a lie or not?