back to article HP sacks English employees to bag Scots gov jobs cash

HP will axe workers in Sheffield and shunt their roles to Renfrewshire in Scotland to bag a £7m grant from the Scottish government, the Public and Commercial Services (PCS) trade union claims. It's understood the multimillion-pound grant from the public purse is a reward for boosting local employment. About a third of support …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

      1. Pax681

        Re: I cant wait

        BTW the same counts for Orkney as well and were they hell .. Orkney for Example was gifted to The Sinclairs of Rosslyn and they became the "Jarls" of Orkney, the Shetlands and Orkney were NOT allies of England.. you are purely making shit up.

        As i said, Orkneys.. Scottish... gifted to the Sinclair...

        And the Shetlands were fundamentally "pawned" to Scotland as part of the dowry for his daughter Margaret to King James III in 1468

        you don't half talk some crap pal.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: I cant wait

          What's up Pax681, don't like history?

          Orkney and Shetland were allied to the British Crown before Independence, and there's a growing appetite to consider their options should you all voter "Yes" in that referendum.

          http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/9794316/Alex-Salmond-warning-over-Shetland-oil-after-independence.html

          You'll love this one.

          http://scottishunionist.blogspot.co.uk/2008/09/independence-for-shetland.html

          What little good ever came Shetland's way from goverments has always come from London, Edinburgh never did us one iota of good, and I've seen nothing from this current incarnation of Scots rulers that anything has changed since 1468.

          1. Pax681

            Re: I cant wait

            ok.. let's say they DO for some reason, decide to stay with the union.. let's say they do... ok?

            they would both have "Enclave" status and only 12 miles of territorial waters which would be within the Scottish waters which are 200 miles from the 12 mile limit.

            and you know what?

            within those 12 miles... no oil and no gas.....

            so it's just another BS scarey story that seems to make the unionist doom and gloom merchants feel good about themselves as they try to scare the vote into a "NO".

            sorry but THIS was precisely covered in the European Journal of international law.

            So i am afraid you'll just have to suck that one up :)

            READ IT AND WEEP

            http://www.ejil.org/pdfs/12/1/505.pdf

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: I cant wait

              @Pax681

              so it's just another BS scarey story that seems to make the unionist doom and gloom merchants feel good about themselves as they try to scare the vote into a "NO".

              Many of us want you to vote "Yes", so there's no attempts being made to scare anyone into voting "No".

              See if you leave it will increase employment opportunities available to English people, as all those "UK" (of course it won't be called "UK" after you've gone) come back south again.

              There goes another nationalist pet theory, sorry to dissappoint you old chap.

              1. Pax681

                Re: I cant wait

                as they say in Scotland..... you talk pish...

                there has always been the "too wee, too poor, too stupid" coming from the no camp.

                and they are ALWAYS trying to spread FUD... it's their stock and trade. The FUD is an attempt to scare the "don't knows" into being a no vote.

          2. Pax681

            Re: I cant wait

            BTW I am reading for my Masters in Scottish history at the University of Edinburgh.. so yeah i love history and not made up nonsense from sources like a blog :)

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: I cant wait

        "actually it wouldn't if Shetland went independent it would be legally classed as an "Enclave" and thus only have 12 miles of territorial waters inside Scottish waters which would extend 200 miles"

        Nope. It would have whatever maritime borders London decided suited the UK best.....Just like they already did with the oil / gas fields....

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: I cant wait

          Quite - the Falklands managed a 200 mile zone, so i'm sure Shetland can do something similar - as a future British Crown Dependency...

        2. Pax681

          Re: I cant wait

          sorry .. but you are wrong, which is why you post as AC.... just a troll. international law and maritime law are against you on this :)

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: I cant wait

            Nope - International Law provides a resolution path and guidance. Precedents have already been set by the current arrangement - and similar examples exist elsewhere in the world where "international law" based were not resolved based on a equi-distant principle.... So basically the Scots can take whatever the hell view they like, but without English agreement and desire, it isn't going to happen.

            Although maybe you could use your Army, Navy and Air force to enforce your viewpoint? Oh, wait....

            1. Pax681

              Re: I cant wait

              you'll find that there is precedent :)

              http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/News/maritime-border-colombia-nicaragua-set-international-court-justice/story?id=17763048#.UcIs6G0gihY

              BTW are you a legal expert? me.. nope.. however i am quite sure the guys at the European journal of International law are... :)

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: I cant wait

                That's an example of why Britain woudl win such a case. The existing agreement (rahter than one forced on the parties) was viewed to stand.

                The process is as follows:

                – Identifying the relevant coasts and baselines;

                – Ascertaining whether there is any pre-existing agreement relating to the delimitation of the maritime areas;

                – Delimiting the territorial sea (where requested) by applying the equidistance-special circumstances rule;

                – Delimiting the continental shelf/EEZ applying the equitable principle-relevant circumstances rule.

                Step 2 is where Scotland won't have a leg to stand on...

              2. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: I cant wait

                Nope - Scotland would loose that one:

                25. The Court must not only look at formal agreements, but also consider whether there is any tacit agreement between the parties. Indeed, in the view of the Court, there is a possibility that State practice (such as oil concession practice in the Cameroon v. Nigeria case, or the regulation of fisheries in the Continental Shelf (Tunisia/Libya Arab Jamahiriya) case) may evidence a tacit agreement or acquiescence to a particular maritime delimitation or delimitation method for the territorial sea, continental shelf and/or EEZ.

                http://chinesejil.oxfordjournals.org/content/9/2/271.full#sec-6

    1. twelvebore
      Happy

      Re: I cant wait

      I visited Shetland a few years ago and was highly amused to see lots of the brown Scottish Tourist Board road signs had had the thistle and the word Scottish spray-painted over. The sort of thing you see in Scotland and Wales on anything with an English slant.

      I certainly got the impression that someone there wanted the Scots to git forked.

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I suspect a "scottish unionist" blog might be somewhat partisan

    http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/3201771

    "An opinion poll of residents of the Northern Isles, commissioned by the Press and Journal newspaper, has given the lie to claims by certain supporters of the anti-independence campaign that Shetland and Orkney might seek to remain a part of the UK if Scotland becomes independent.

    The poll, published in the newspaper on Wednesday, finds that 82%, the overwhelming majority, of the islanders wish to remain Scottish.

    Asked "Should Shetland/Orkney be independent countries, separate from Scotland?" only 8% of islanders who participated in the poll said that they were in agreement, with a further 10% saying they did not know."

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: I suspect a "scottish unionist" blog might be somewhat partisan

      "The poll, published in the newspaper on Wednesday, finds that 82%, the overwhelming majority, of the islanders wish to remain Scottish."

      Erm, no. It found that they did not want to be "independent countries, separate from Scotland"

      If they had been asked 'would you want to remain part of the United Kingdom' then the answer would likely have been very different....

  2. JP19
    FAIL

    Devolution

    Scots hated being governed by a pack of wankers in Westminster.

    So did/do the English.

    The Scots had this brilliant idea to at great expense have their own pack of wankers.

    So now Britain has an extra 129 wankers and pissed away £420 million just on building a house for them.

    Paying HP 7 million quid to sack a load of people and hire them somewhere else is one of the great ideas these extra wankers came up with.

    1. Pax681

      Re: Devolution

      Actually you'll find that it was in 1979 that the Scots decided they wanted their own assembly however some anus in Westminster changed the rules in an early day motion to make it so that if people didn't turn out to vote... like the recently dead for example... that those non votes were ruled to be np votes.

      The EU then pressured the Westminster govt about self determination and "regional assemblies" and the Blair govt presented it like it was all their idea.. which it wasn't.

      If you want to blame anyone about the cost of the building... which the people of /Scotland were also very pissed off about ... then how about you blame the labour run procurement procedures at the time whereby all the contracts went to their pals in construction.

      And ask Labour why they never put penalty clauses in it for lateness or a penalty for moving the goal posts on costs..... Also have a look into what board members have heavy labour connections via membership or being donors.. that'll give you the answer :)

  3. Marko71
    WTF?

    Giant corporation in decision ot cut costs shocker!!

    Part of the move is cost but not just due to grants, HP owns the building at Erskine (its been there 25 years), there is no rent to pay on it thus it's a money saver. This has been ongoing for 2 years now since they moved out of Thames Valley Park to save a fortune of rent in the London area.

    Erskine is one of HP's key global centres, as the company needs to save money due to a terrible previous year obviously it's going to move work to more economical regions & especially to a huge campus it already owns. If the campus were in Newcastle it would all have been moved there, but it's not its near Glasgow so thats where some of the jobs are going.

    The Anti Scottish rubbish on this thread is vile and nonsensical, this has nothing to do with the Scottish people or a measely grant which pales compared to the money that is being paid in rent for the ex EDS sites which HP have been moving out of. I thought the people who visit this site were meant to be educated & professional workers, nice to see that both of those traits dont exclude bitter racism & general hatred from being spouted.

    I've worked at the Erskine site for almost 9 years now & it's constantly in a state of flux employment as it houses many GBU's. Just two years ago over 1000 lost their jobs here to the Czech Republic but I dont recall such anti Czech spouting going on then, but maybe thats becasue it didnt happen to an English site?

    Also many of those people who were to be displaced when TVP shut moved here, so Scotland cant be that bad a place to be & I'm sure some of the Sheffield folk will move to Newcastle or Erskine, but please dont let that get in the way of your pitchfork & torch session.

    Let the downvotes, "You would say that you HP lackey" & uneeded swearing begin. ;-)

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Giant corporation in decision ot cut costs shocker!!

      The focus of these comments has indeed errantly been on beano style 'Jocks and Geordies' rubbish. Where it should have been concentrating on shining a light on what a shower of faeces HP, and EDS before them, are.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Giant corporation in decision ot cut costs shocker!!

      nice to see that both of those traits dont exclude bitter racism & general hatred from being spouted.

      40+ years of having to listen to Scots direct bitter racism and general hatred at the English was always going to have an effect, don't you think?

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Where are you Eadon!

    Can you comment here so that the discussion becomes slightly more balanced and rational?

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Hearts / heads

    ASAICS The Scottish Vote is basically on two levels: financial and emotional. The financial aspect seems to be very unclear, but the emotional aspect is VERY clear. I find that Scots often let their hearts rule their heads when it comes to England, as it did when a very intelligent Scottish friend got drunk and advised me that 'ye hav nay culture' because I was English. I reeled off a long list of items of which I considered to be 'English culture', whereupon he ran out of the pub, put his foot through a telephone kiosk and charged down the street yelling 'FOOK THE ANGLISH'

    I think the 'emotionals' will prevail in the Vote, and good luck to them.... finally the English will get some peace, and perhaps an opportunity to govern ourselves.

  6. MagicBoy
    Alert

    Far from the first time this has happened. IBM Global Services relocated the account I was working on from Manchester to Greenock in 2002, to populate a new building. The large chunk of government cash to help them put up a new building was just a co-incidence. 3 years later it was closed...

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like