Examination of Witness (Questions 320
- 339)
WEDNESDAY 20 NOVEMBER 2002
MR JOHN
BRIDGEMAN, CBE TD DL
320. Given all of those concerns, can I talk
about consultation as part of the New Chapter? For your organisation,
what is the extent of your involvement in the consultation?
(Mr Bridgeman) Since I was in New York on the 54th
floor of the Citibank Tower on September 11, one of the first
things I did when I came back was to talk to my people about some
of the things that I saw but in my contacts with ministers shortly
afterwards it became clear that things were not going to be the
same again. We had been party to the same seminar in Birmingham
which Colonel Mike Taylor attended. We have been in heavy consultation
mode with a wide range of employers in the private and public
sector through the people on our board, through the employers
that we meet. We have representatives of representative organisations
also on the board. We have a representative from the CBI, the
IOD; another member of the board used to be the director general
of the Engineering Employers' Federation. The fact that we have
good links into the employer community has been used by the Ministry
of Defence to very much be their eyes and ears and to test the
temperature of the water. I have no complaints about the extent
to which we have been involved.
321. Happily, there is very strong support for
consultation earlier on. The involvement of employers in the consultation
on the New Chapter would have been through your organisation?
(Mr Bridgeman) Not solely. We certainly are not there
to be the representative of the employer movement. We are there
to be the eyes and ears of the Secretary of State on the ground,
but there are many other ways that employers can make their voices
heard. They themselves can respond directly to the Ministry of
Defence. They can use their Members of Parliament, which they
have chosen to do. Employers would not look necessarily to us
to represent their views.
322. In terms of the MoD actively recruiting
comments from employers they would come to you but they will have
not said that BT have a disproportionate number of reservists
and we must actively go and talk to BT and find out what their
thoughts are on the New Chapter?
(Mr Bridgeman) No, but I ensured that that took place.
I ensured that BT were able to meet with appropriate people to
share their specific concerns.
323. Given that employers were not actively
canvassed, do you think they generally have enough understanding
of the New Chapter process for them to know that it was even going
on for them to forward their comments independently of your organisation?
(Mr Bridgeman) I think that is very difficult to say
because we have not done an opinion survey to find out what the
level of awareness was. We have tested it out quite a bit since
then but I honestly do not think that if we had embarked on a
much more expensive and detailed consultation we would have got
a lot more useful information.
Rachel Squire
324. I was listening to what you were saying
about the consultation process and employers' concerns about a
greater use of reserves and so on. I fully appreciate their concerns.
Can I ask you whether you gain the impression that there is any
increased commitment, post-September 11, from employers? If it
came to dealing with some major terrorist incident in this country,
they would not on an occasion like that be willing to put the
interests of the nation before their own immediate interests as
an employer?
(Mr Bridgeman) Put like that, of course employers
will always think of the nation but employers frequently have
an obligation through their company also to be sure that they
can provide the necessary level of response. That is why it is
so important, I believe, that in this new era post-September 11
whatever we want to do with our reserves should be done in close
consultation with their employers. In the public sector, we rely
quite significantly on various police forces to provide the reserves.
If you look at our top 25 public sector employers, five of them
are police forces. There is the whole of the health sector. I
have mentioned BT. Many of these people will say, "Yes, of
course we have people who are reservists and they joined up for
these sort of things, but if there is a national crisis, if there
is an emergency, you will be asking us to do things as well in
the company", and we have to be sure that we can resolve
these conflict of interest matters.
Patrick Mercer
325. You have talked already about some of the
surprises that might come an employer's way about reservists.
The concept of the Civil Contingencies Reaction Forces: how is
that going to go down with employers? Not only do they have reservists
but they now have reservists with much shorter notices to move,
who have a greater training commitment.
(Mr Bridgeman) I would revert to the way I answered
the previous question. It will all depend on whether the employer
thinks he has one. If he thinks he has one—and we will be
talking about quite a small number of employers—he will
take a keen interest but until employers know whether they are
going to be affected this is just one bit of information or clutter
on their desk. There is a very wide range of volunteer initiatives
which we are asking employers to consider. There is jury service;
there are school governors; there are hospital trusts; there are
community policemen. What a lot of employers, particularly the
bigger ones, see is that they are being imposed on and this is
yet another demand. "Please do not give us the problem unless
you are sure we are affected." Part of our job at the National
Employers Advisory Board is to be sure that, when the CCRF is
being further debated, at an early point, individuals' employers
are consulted in some sort of way to ensure that there is no conflict
of interest. That is going to be a small number of employers out
of the three million in the whole country.
326. All reservists therefore will have two
extra training days and CCRFs will have five extra training days.
Their answer will be it depends on the employer, what the reaction
will be.
(Mr Bridgeman) Yes, and in so many cases the training
which an individual reservist undergoes is done in his own time,
without any particular knowledge of the employer anyway. Employers
know that training takes place but whether it is on weekends or
in the evenings and whether it is extra days or not tends really
not to concern them.
327. Do you think there will be any difficulty
finding volunteers to respond to this new task?
(Mr Bridgeman) My job is to ensure that whatever volunteers
we have, have supportive employers. However many we get, we try
and deliver as much employer support as we can.
328. Is your perception that there will be any
difficulty?
(Mr Bridgeman) I do not think so.
Mr Cran
329. As you know, the Civil Contingency Reaction
Forces run at 36 hours' notice to act in an emergency. Is that
supported by employers?
(Mr Bridgeman) It depends on the nature of the job
which the civilian is doing in his normal place of work. There
are certain hospitals, for example, that could not possibly provide
replacement skills at that sort of shortage of time. If I talk
to people in power stations, people in the utilities, people in
BT, the ability of an employer to support short mobilisation is
almost totally a function of his ability to provide the replacement
skill for a key task.
330. How do you think it is going to work out
in practice? As Rachel Squire said, we might have an emergency
similar to the one which occurred on September 11. Against that
background, how is it going to work in practice? What does the
employer say? Does the employer say to the individual in question,
"No, you cannot go because we cannot replace you"?
(Mr Bridgeman) I have been very encouraged about what
I call the smart mobilisation culture which we have embarked on
since September 11. We are focusing our attention on mobilising
the mobilisable such that we have addressed key employer issues
of key skills at the outset. I am hoping the same attention will
be given to the mobilisability of the CCRF at the time we enter
into this vital debate with employers as to what these people's
jobs are. If it is a question of two or three weeks' warning,
employers are much more on side about having those reserves because
they know that is why people are in the reserves, to be used.
To be mobilisable at 24, 12, 36 or 48 hours' notice will have
some very serious repercussions. In the case of small companies,
it could be life and death. There is another sector, which is
employers who are involved in what I call "vital defence
contracts". The MoD and its suppliers are major supporters
of reserves and suppliers of reserve manpower. We must be careful
that we do not rob Peter to pay Paul.
331. I understand and support everything that
you have said because I can see those situations occurring. Having
been associated with the CBI at one point, if you asked companies
their views on any one issue, you would get a whole range of reactions
from the very enthusiastic to the very unenthusiastic and a whole
blob in between. I am searching for you to tell me that employers
in general are not going to, not not cooperate, but put the telescope
to the blind eye when these situations occur. Are you quite confident
about that?
(Mr Bridgeman) This is a good cause and sensible employers
support good causes. There are of course going to be some employers
who for their own particular reasons will not be as supportive
as we would like. This is not a perfect world. Overwhelmingly,
I believe that employers, treated properly and responsibly, will
give all the support they possibly can to the reserves on their
payroll.
332. That is the answer I wanted. Do you think
employers would support a reduction, if it became necessary, in
the 36 hours' notice to be on duty? What do you think employer
reaction would be?
(Mr Bridgeman) I am sure if I asked any employer how
much warning he would need for mobilisation he would tell me an
answer which is much longer than we are ever going to be able
to give. It is a question of contact with the employer, part of
the important dialogue. Let us be sure to mobilise the mobilisable
and let us not put unfair, improper burdens on employers to deliver
something which would cause damage to the economy and to essential
services.
Mr Roy
333. There have been calls for a register of
skills for reservists to be established. Is there not such a database
at the moment?
(Mr Bridgeman) We have a register of supportive employers.
334. Not a skills database?
(Mr Bridgeman) We are not really involved in the skills
of the individual reservists. Our job is to ensure employer support
for whatever skills mix we have in our reserves manpower.
335. Do you not think it would be a good idea,
for example, looking at the big picture, that you at least knew
what skills were available from the men and women that you have?
(Mr Bridgeman) I am sure those people using reservists
would want to know that but that is really outside our responsibility.
Chairman
336. Hopefully somebody will have that information.
(Mr Bridgeman) I would hope so.
Mr Roy
337. Presumably those reservists would gain
great military experience and skills as well. Is that military
skill recognised by the employers and, if it is, is it used?
(Mr Bridgeman) Yes, it is. We have done quite a lot
of work in this area. We did some work in the early part of the
year about the things which employers valued the most. It is not
the military skills they value the most. The things they value
are ability to plan, to communicate, team skills, ability to think
ahead, ability to think for others, perhaps an extra bit of fitness.
It is more personal characteristics that people value in our reserve
manpower than specific military skills. There is a second level:
handling hazardous materials, the ability to instruct, perhaps
skills in the handling of a specialist vehicle, things like that.
The main skills which employers value are personal skills.
338. Presumably those personal skills would
be enhanced by the military experience?
(Mr Bridgeman) Without doubt. It is very much a two
way street. Employers benefit from military training. Our reservists
benefit enormously from the skills which they acquire in their
civilian workplace, so we have to be careful that we do not say
it is all one way traffic.
339. What is your opinion? For example, is there
an advantage to the military from the men and women's civilian
skills? Do the military recognise those?
(Mr Bridgeman) I believe they do and I think employers
find this rather encouraging. The reservist, job for job, tends
to be rather older and more mature than his regular counterpart.
A reservist tends to stay in his army occupation or naval occupation
rather longer than his regular counterpart. These things feed
back into the civilian workplace. Equally, things from the civilian
workplace feed into the military situation. There are huge benefits
for both.
| 
