Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
It's a sinking ship, Go coach pulling themselves away may have saved their backs too, especially as they have new work tenders and are growing. It's sad to see another independent fall but at least it wasn't a mid service "right we're closed, back to depot asap" type wrap up. Hulleys had the right ideas just implemented poorly and that can trace back to the X1 X57 and then their Go against stagecoach with a I'll fated open top, I do hope the staff can TUPE to new operations and still serve their local customers.
Be interesting to see how the TUPE works as potentially not all the work is going to one other operator. Drivers are being asked to fill in a form stating which operator they want to work for. What if they all select High Peak and the work all goes to Stagecoach? Are high peak going to take on all the drivers?
This reminds me of when Goodwins/Little Gem closed in Eccles. The owner got them continuation of employment at nearby Diamond and referred to it as Tupe’ing over - but it wasn’t. They were ending employment with one company on one day and starting with another the next day.
I actually agree with you and have just said as much in my post above.
I would imagine other operators have agreed to take staff on and possibly will try and match terms and conditions but as one company isn’t taking over the entire business or contracts TUPE wouldn’t be an option.
Again it’s slightly naughty of the owner to use the word TUPE and suggest other employers will meet terms and conditions.
No because in the letter it says drivers will be given forms to select which operator they want to move across too.
No driver is going to ask to transfer to High peak when they can get a £1000 bonus if they leave Hulley’s and apply at High Peak.
Be interesting to see how the TUPE works as potentially not all the work is going to one other operator. Drivers are being asked to fill in a form stating which operator they want to work for. What if they all select High Peak and the work all goes to Stagecoach? Are high peak going to take on all the drivers?
This reminds me of when Goodwins/Little Gem closed in Eccles. The owner got them continuation of employment at nearby Diamond and referred to it as Tupe’ing over - but it wasn’t. They were ending employment with one company on one day and starting with another the next day.
And highly doubtful the new operator/employer will honour the T&Cs Hulleys had. At best the (former) Owner of Hulley's can put in a good word to potential new employers but I'm almost certain that TUPE isn't applicable here nor would TUPE be dependant on people working their booked shifts for the next 2 days at intimated
And highly doubtful the new operator/employer will honour the T&Cs Hulleys had. At best the (former) Owner of Hulley's can put in a good word to potential new employers but I'm almost certain that TUPE isn't applicable here nor would TUPE be dependant on people working their booked shifts for the next 2 days at intimated
That's a bit naff, but given high peak are short applying 3rd party would be a better shout. Definitely too early to tell where the chips will land though,
That's a bit naff, but given high peak are short applying 3rd party would be a better shout. Definitely too early to tell where the chips will land though,
As it goes it’s probably a better time to be made redundant as every operator big and small will take drivers on. High peak has the feel of an independent (went for an interview there myself once), so many of the drivers would slot in nicely, and probably be looked after a lot better than they have been!
That's a bit naff, but given high peak are short applying 3rd party would be a better shout. Definitely too early to tell where the chips will land though,
That's the choice you take.. go the TUPE route, guaranteed employment on your current T&Cs, keep your length of service etc; or quit, apply as an outsider, get moved on to standard T&Cs but get a cash bonus.
However, as above, I highly doubt TUPE is an option here as no Hulley's staff are employed to only drive a certain DCC contracted route or routes. They are employed across all of Hulleys routes
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
As it goes it’s probably a better time to be made redundant as every operator big and small will take drivers on. High peak has the feel of an independent (went for an interview there myself once), so many of the drivers would slot in nicely, and probably be looked after a lot better than they have been!
That's the choice you take.. go the TUPE route, guaranteed employment on your current T&Cs, keep your length of service etc; or quit, apply as an outsider, get moved on to standard T&Cs but get a cash bonus.
My understanding is that only a handful of employees have more than a few years service, so for many a decent sign-on bonus is probably worth more than any benefits due to length of service.
The letter he has sent staff is laughable to say the least. Drivers will only be able to TUPE over to other operators IF they complete remaining shifts.
And the best bit states that all personal possessions must be removed from site and reference requests must be made before Wednesday as ‘the owner’ won’t be available after the 26th.
Have access to what?
He will have an email address and a mobile phone.
Surly he wants to support his staff?
With statements like what he’s made it says the complete opposite!
Have access to what?
He will have an email address and a mobile phone.
Surly he wants to support his staff?
With statements like what he’s made it says the complete opposite!
Staff have been informed by the Receivers that company issued phones will have their contracts cancelled after Wednesday. The (former) owner is effectively made redundant by the Receivers, who are now running the business, after Wednesday. It may well be the conditions of that redundancy prevent him from any further involvement with or on behalf of the company.
He could of course offer support in a personal capacity but will be unable to negotiate with other operators in that capacity.
The letter states that staff should remove personal possessions from the depot by end of business on Wednesday as nobody will be able to access the site after then. It then says that he (Alf Crofts) will not be "available".
As far as I understand it he is not allowed to deal with anything after Wednesday unless required by the receiver to assist in the sale of the assets... so in a sense he isn't available as he can't do anything!
It's perhaps a poor choice of words, but the man has just had to appoint a receiver to close down his business. I think that would affect most people's letter writing skills.
The letter states that staff should remove personal possessions from the depot by end of business on Wednesday as nobody will be able to access the site after then. It then says that he (Alf Crofts) will not be "available".
As far as I understand it he is not allowed to deal with anything after Wednesday unless required by the receiver to assist in the sale of the assets... so in a sense he isn't available as he can't do anything!
It's perhaps a poor choice of words, but the man has just had to appoint a receiver to close down his business. I think that would affect most people's letter writing skills.
I’ve been in a very similar position to the drivers at Hulley’s and while I completely understand that the receivers take over day to day running of the company many would still rather approach ‘Alf’ for support and potential help. Reading that he won’t be available after Wednesday just sounds tactless and unsupportive.
Like I said I received a very similar letter once Upon a time and while management couldn’t do much regarding owed wages and holiday pay etc they were very much there on a personal level and still are!
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
The letter makes it clear he won’t be available. He’s an employer who’s at some point taken these people on, worked with them, dealt with issues with them etc - to simply say he won’t available after Wednesday just suggests very arrogantly he’s washing his hands of the whole thing.
And to be honest looking back at some of his tactless social media responses in the past it sounds about right!
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Im not confused. I completely understand he won’t have any access to the site after Wednesday and that all items will be seized by administrators.
It’s the last line ‘I won’t be available after this date’ - suggesting he won’t be available for any purpose after this date which comes across as rather unsupportive to his loyal staff.
Im not confused. I completely understand he won’t have any access to the site after Wednesday and that all items will be seized by administrators.
It’s the last line ‘I won’t be available after this date’ - suggesting he won’t be available for any purpose after this date which comes across as rather unsupportive to his loyal staff.
And the best bit states that all personal possessions must be removed from site and reference requests must be made before Wednesday as ‘the owner’ won’t be available after the 26th.
Receivers have been appointed. Vehicles on lease will go back, vehicles owned will be sold off to the highest bidder at auction most likely, along with any plant/machinery etc. I suspect most of the vehicles bar probably the newer Solos and E200s will be sold for scrap
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
The Evora’s will be popular as they are well liked by operators. Quite a number of other vehicles are Euro6 so can be used in areas that have clean air zone requirements.
The Evora’s will be popular as they are well liked by operators. Quite a number of other vehicles are Euro6 so can be used in areas that have clean air zone requirements.
With a PI in to his repute as a TM looming (that doesn't go away just because the company has ceased) which could result in a ban for him acting as a TM, and potential proceedings following the collapse of the company which could result in a ban of being a Company Director he may well not pop up anywhere again
I am astounded at the extent of interest on this forum (1900+ posts so far) in this minor rural bus company that currently "runs" (until its imminent demise) just 10 relatively infrequent services.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
