Examination of Witness (Questions 340
- 350)
WEDNESDAY 20 NOVEMBER 2002
MR JOHN
BRIDGEMAN, CBE TD DL
340. That goes for anybody in the TA?
(Mr Bridgeman) Any of the services, yes.
Rachel Squire
341. Could you say what the employers' perspective
is on the future of the reserves?
(Mr Bridgeman) There is a nervousness abroad that,
in the course of the past few years, we are putting more and more
demands on our reserves. Before September 11, we were asking more
and more reserves to volunteer for service overseas. 6,000 reservists
have already been to the Balkans in the course of the past eight
years or so. Now, post-September 11, we have had three compulsory
mobilisations. We are now talking about CCRF. There is a nervousness
in the employer community as to how much more we are going to
use our reserves. The onus is on us to be sure that they are used
properly. I know the Ministry of Defence is very aware of that.
342. Do employers have any preference about
shorter, more regular absences for reserves rather than the long
period that you mention overseas?
(Mr Bridgeman) There are huge differences in the three
services. The Territorial Army tends to be exposed to the longest
deployments. The Royal Air Force, somewhat shorter; the Royal
Navy, shorter again. I have been very encouraged and employers
are very encouraged by the way that people in the Royal Naval
Reserve bring ships home so that key personnel can be released
to do other jobs. There is a regular input for Royal Naval reservists
now on ships to do exercises of a very short duration. From a
number of points of view, the Royal Auxiliary Air Force and the
Royal Naval Reserve are more employer friendly in their deployments.
In the medical area, where we are particularly dependent upon
reservists, the Ministry of Defence has been hugely more flexible
in terms of the length of service. There have been terms of service
of consultants of a matter of days. That increased flexibility
is to be welcomed.
343. Would employers support the creation of
a more numerous civil defence force across Britain?
(Mr Bridgeman) I think employers are very aware that
the whole matter of coping with what might happen in the homeland
is a multiple responsibility of the emergency services, the uniformed
services or whatever. What employers need to be assured is that
the matter is being dealt with by the right people in the right
time at the right place. The mix of policemen or special constables
or military reservists they leave to others. The proof of the
pudding will be when it has to be used.
Mr Crausby
344. 80% of reservists report their employers
as supportive but are we right to assume that the 20% that do
not report their employers to be supportive tend to be private
employers and probably small? We can understand that it must be
quite dramatic for a small, private employer to consider a deployment
of six months' duration. How employer friendly are we? Could we
be a bit more employer friendly, particularly towards those employers
who have very real difficulties?
(Mr Bridgeman) Amazingly, the small, private sector
organisation that has a reservist is probably one of the most
supportive groups that we could have because they know him so
well. He is a key member of the team and if he wants to do it
they support him. He would not be on the books otherwise.
345. Would shorter absences be more preferable
to employers?
(Mr Bridgeman) The shorter the better and hopefully
never but we live in the real world. To come to your 80%, yes,
between one in four and one in five reservists say they do not
have a supportive employer. In many cases, it may be that the
employer is just not supportive. In other cases, it is employers
who have a supportive policy but they have not made it work on
the ground. We nag employers and say, "If you are going to
sign up to be supportive, can you please be sure that you really
are implementing your policies." There are some key issues
in the public sector which I will come back to. There are a number
of chief constables who are not able to say they will be supportive.
There are a number of fire brigade areas who are not able to feel
they are supportive and yet the same chief constables know it
is probably going on. I think we have a duty to these reservists
in these areas that we do not prejudice the fact that they are
very loyal reservists but they have a real problem at work. Yes,
you could argue between one in four and one in five of our reservists
might well have a real problem at work for whatever reason. It
is up to us to find out what the problem is and address it to
give him the support that he looks to us for. That is the essence
of the job of my organisation.
346. Does that not put even more pressure on
small, private employers? Are there any incentives that we could
offer, tax breaks, for instance, particularly to encourage small,
private employers?
(Mr Bridgeman) I think there probably are. Australia
has now realised that they will not get the amount of support
from the private sector that they believe they need unless they
make some financial payments available and they have started that.
We are watching that with very great interest. The extent to which
we are able to secure so much benefit from having our reserves
and all the skills that they acquire in civilian life is such
that it would not be inappropriate to think about more financial
compensation for employers. I used not to think that because I
said, "When we can get so much for nothing, why should we
have to pay for a little bit more?" I am afraid September
11 has changed that. We have never asked more of our employers
of reservists and we are going to be asking for more in the future.
Mr Howarth
347. Of the least supportive employers, have
you been able to identify any common factors? In particular, is
there any evidence at all that foreign owned companies are less
enthusiastic about their staff being members of the reserve forces?
Do any of them to your knowledge specifically exclude from their
employment people who do join the reserve forces?
(Mr Bridgeman) Most of Britain's major, international
companies are on our list of supportive employers. You would not
be surprised to learn that since September 11 the American owned
companies of which we have a large number, car companies, energy
companies, software companies, are very supportive. I am not aware
of any concerns in that area. It is interesting that there used
to be a concern. Japanese companies were a difficulty but it was
because of a lack of understanding by a generation of Japanese
managers of what an important part reserves were in our society.
With the help of the Japanese ambassador, Ambassador Fuji, we
were able to get the Japanese embassy to make it clear by writing
to Japanese employers in Japanese that it is an okay thing to
do in the United Kingdom, notwithstanding the history of 60 years
ago. That perhaps needs to be done again. Employer support is
rather like painting the Forth Bridge in that employers are changing
all the time. When you think you have a population of supportive
employers, you turn your back and everyone has changed in two
years' time. We have to keep going back to these people and reinforcing
the message.
Chairman
348. You gave us some really interesting statistics
in the beginning. If it is possible to send us those, we would
be most grateful.
(Mr Bridgeman) I would be happy to.
349. Secondly, you mentioned the 6,200 employers
who were generally supportive. If it might be helpful to you,
could you write to us, knowing the members of the Committee, because
I am sure most of the members of the Committee would like to talk
to a good employer, either in their constituency or in their area,
and thank them for what they are doing. Thirdly, if you are going
to communicate with them, as I am sure you will, no doubt you
will convey to them that you appeared before the Committee and
will you transmit to them on behalf of this Committee our deep
appreciation to those employers who are cooperating? We hold our
reserve forces, the TA and the Royal Naval Reserve in the highest
esteem and we, as a Committee, would wish to thank all of those
and their employers for the contribution they are making to the
defence and security of this country.
(Mr Bridgeman) Thank you very much for putting that
on the record. That is one of the most powerful weapons for enhancing
employer support that we could have and I am indebted to you.
350. Fix it up with the head honcho in BT because
I would like to go and tell him I am a great subscriber of BT
and I thank him for holding the record.
(Mr Bridgeman) We have the information and I will
make it available to you.
Chairman: Thank you very much and thanks
too to those who gave evidence earlier.
|
