What did you get rewarded for? What got you 'kudos'?
I ask these questions because the answers will shine the light on the set of rules taken on by you when you were very young. In those early, impressionable, years you observed your environment and made up a Rule book to help you get by.
You learned the rule that if you put your hand on a hot stove you would get burned. You learned the rule that in order to cross the street safely it's important to look both ways for oncoming traffic before you cross.
Perhaps you noticed that if you made a mistake your Mom would get angry, not very loving towards you. So, your wrote in your Rule book: Love = not making any mistakes. If I want to be loved I have to not make mistakes, be perfect."
Or you might have written a rule that read something like this; "If I'm a good girl I can have dessert so 'extra food' is confirmation that you're good."
Or, you may have been told that men don't cry - so you rarely express any emotion when you're sad or hurt (until you can't keep it in any more and you explode!).
These rules served you well in your environment growing up as a child. Many of these rules have no relevance in your life today, yet you still live by that very same Rulebook that you created when you were oh so very young.
It's time to create some New Rules!
The most important step is to be Willing.
Be willing to self-examine, without judgment. Be willing to take responsibility for all of your experiences good and bad.
Question your thinking and ask the Wizard Within if there are thoughts that are holding you back. You developed these thoughts as a coping mechanism when you were young. This is how your Inner Critic was born. He served you then by keeping your safe. Does your Inner Critic and these thoughts serve you now? After all, you are no longer in that same environment.
You may discover that an event from your childhood has made you think that you need to respond to current situations in the same way you responded when you were young and just developing your skills. It may have been a good strategy when you were little but if it's not working for you now, then you need to change it. For example, if a parent scolded you as said you were 'bad' you might have created an "I'm not good enough" rule. Is this true? Of course not! Create a new rule. "I am good enough. I do plenty of good things for others and myself every day." And notice when you do something good, even if it's just offering a kind word to someone you work with.
Be mindful. Pay attention to how you react and what actions you take to solve certain problems. You should be able to see where how your behavior is creating the results that you get. Who made the decision upon which you took action, your Inner Critic or the Wizard Within?
If you don't like the results then you your thoughts might benefit from a few minor adjustments. Often just becoming aware of what you've been doing will change your habit. It takes practice. Just like when you learned how to ride a bike, you might have a wobbly experience at first. You might even skin your knees. That's ok. You will heal easily and eventually become an expert at riding your bike, and using your new rulebook! If there are areas in your life that just aren't working whether it's with friends, work, or personal relationships, then this might be a clue that you are following old rules and it's time to create new ones that serve you instead of hold you back. Give it a try. You'll be amazed at the difference you can make in your life simply by developing New Rules!
Copyright (c) 2009 Valery Satterwhite
The Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 revoked the 1981 Regulations in their entirety. The most significant change under the new regime is the extension of the definition of relevant transfer so that both standard business transfers and qualifying service provision changes are covered by TUPE 2006. The position in relation to standard business transfers is the same as under the 1981 regulations. However, TUPE 2006 now codifies some of the principles of standard business transfers which have evolved through case law. The government's rationale for implementing TUPE 2006 was that it would provide a ?level playing field' by removing uncertainty as to whether or not the regulations apply upon an outsourcing or insourcing of services or a change of service provider. The certainty given will enable bids to be made for contracts on a true commercial basis, without the need for margins to be built-in to cover uncertainty.
Service Provision Change
A service provision change under the TUPE 2006 regulations means that employees will be entitled to transfer on the same terms and conditions as they enjoyed with their original employer. A service provision change occurs when a client who engages a contractor to do work on its behalf is either:
? reassigning such a contract, or
? bringing the work ?in-house'.
There are two exceptions. It will not be a service provision change if:
? the contract is wholly or mainly for the supply of goods for the client's use, or
? the activities are carried out in connection with a single specific event or a task of short-term duration.
Under the 1981 TUPE regulations service provision changes could be relevant transfers if they also fell within the definition of a business transfer. In Ayse Suzen v Gebauderreinninging GMBH Krankenhausservice the ECJ established that upon a transfer in a labour intensive sector the regulations would only apply where the activity in question equalled a continuity of an economic entity. This would include a transfer of the majority of the workforce in terms of skills or numbers.
It is clear that some cases decided under the 1981 regulations would be decided differently under TUPE 2006. There may not have been a relevant transfer under the 1981 regulations if a replacement contractor took no employees or other assets from the old contractor and carried out the services in a different way, to the extent that no economic entity had transferred. Working out when a transfer had taken place in essentially service provision sectors was unpredictable and costly. TUPE 2006 is therefore welcome legal clarity.
Organised grouping of employees
TUPE 2006 will not apply to service provision change where employees are not working in a single economic grouping. The DTI guidance explains that the team should be ?essentially dedicated to carrying out the activities that are to transfer (though they do not need to work exclusively on those activities)'. It then gives the example of a courier service serviced by various different couriers on an ad hoc basis (which would not qualify) in contrast to a service carried out by an identifiable team of employees (which would).
Nor will there be a service provision change if there is an organised grouping of employees but they do not have a principal purpose of carrying out activities for a particular client. For example, an IT telephone helpdesk may have a team of staff dedicated to providing a particular service but for 3 or 4 clients rather than one. There is no guidance as to the percentage of time spent by the employee, over what period, which is necessary to meet the ?principal purpose' threshold. This is likely to be a fruitful area of dispute in the courts.
Maintaining identity not required for Service Provision changes
TUPE 2006 makes it clear that in order for there to be a relevant transfer an entity must retain its identity post transfer, but this is not a specific requirement under TUPE 2006 for service provision changes. One question that remains unanswered is whether a service provision change can occur even where the service does not retain its identity following the transfer because the incoming service provider changes fundamentally the way in which it provides the service.
Although TUPE 2006 offers welcome clarity there are also fairly obvious definitional problems that will keep the courts busy in the future. Indeed the case law that applied to TUPE 1981 will still to some extent prove useful.
Both Valery Satterwhite & Ian Mann are contributors for EditorialToday. The above articles have been edited for relevancy and timeliness. All write-ups, reviews, tips and guides published by EditorialToday.com and its partners or affiliates are for informational purposes only. They should not be used for any legal or any other type of advice. We do not endorse any author, contributor, writer or article posted by our team.
Valery Satterwhite has sinced written about articles on various topics from self improvement and motivation, Education and self improvement and motivation. Valery is the Founder of the International Association for Inner Wizards. Learn how to tame your Inner Critic (self-doubt and fear), empower your Inner Wizard (intuition and inspiration) to turn your dreams into reality. Your Inner Wizard is your best Coa. Valery Satterwhite's top article generates over 3600 views. to your Favourites.
Ian Mann has sinced written about articles on various topics from Retirement, Recruitment and Employment Law. Ian Mann - Employment Barrister13 King's Bench Wal. Ian Mann's top article generates over 5400 views. to your Favourites.