Defence firm BAE Systems has said it is planning to shed almost 1,400 jobs - mainly as a result of cutbacks made in the government's Spending Review.

The jobs are set to go in Lancashire, Greater Manchester, Moray, Ayrshire, Hampshire, Rutland and Somerset.

The Spending Review included plans to cut defence spending by 8% over four years.

Nimrod surveillance planes and Harrier fighter jets - both of which BAE worked on - are being axed.

The cancellation of the Nimrod MRA4 programme would also see the Woodford site in Cheshire close earlier than announced, BAE said.
Harrier jump jet Harrier jump jets are being withdrawn from the RAF early

It said in September last year that Woodford, which employs 630 people, would close at the end of 2012. However, no new date was given.

BAE said it had been studying the impact of the review on its business, adding that it had now begun consulting on "potential job losses" at six sites plus two RAF bases.

It said the job cuts were "designed to ensure we remain competitive as we actively pursue a number of opportunities for other products and services, both in the UK and internationally".
'Devastating blow'

At Chadderton in Greater Manchester (79 potential job losses), Prestwick in Ayrshire (55), Yeovil in Somerset (15) and RAF Kinloss in Moray (30), the potential job losses were linked to the cancellation of the Nimrod, BAE said.

Losses at Farnborough in Hampshire (214) and RAF Cottesmore in Rutland (127) are associated with the early withdrawal of the Harrier fleet.

Meanwhile, Samlesbury (119) and Warton (668), both in Lancashire, have been hit by both projects.

BAE Systems said a further 90 UK jobs might go at its Saudi Arabia business, mainly at Samlesbury.

The Unite union said the announcement was "a tragedy for the workforce and for Britain" and called on the government to rethink its defence plans.

"The coalition government's Christmas present to over 1,000 skilled workers who support Britain's armed forces is the sack," added national officer Bernie Hamilton.

Meanwhile Keith Hazelwood, national officer of the GMB, said it was a "devastating blow for UK manufacturing and the local communities".

He said his union would look to see if any of the workers could be redeployed to other projects, including green and space technology.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11958135

Not good news, but inevitable really. I reckon Harrier at Farnborough must be pretty much dead now.

The defence industry has become bloated on years of sloppy contracts. They need to slim down but my thoughts are for those about to lose their jobs.

Yet another kick in the bollocks for the provinces, especially the northwest. It won't be long before the only jobs around are in the south east again.

Where have we seen this before...?

The cold-hearted rational analysis is that; If you take into account the enormous cost of subsidising defence manufacturing jobs, and the additional cost of subsidising most of their exports, the average glue sniffing shoplifter is a greater economic asset to the UK economy than the average BAE employee. Technically we should be making as many of them redundant as we possibly can.

It's bad news for those losing their jobs, with who knows what knock on effects that may have on their lives. But most of them are highly trained and have transferrable skills, so they should be able to bring their talents to a more productive company than BAE. When a large engineering enterprise shuts down, it usually results in a lot of engineers who have been toying with the idea of launching their own companies suddenly getting a big wedge of cash to fund the operation.

Yes the cost per job subsidised in the defence industry is immense. Longer term I would like to see a smaller more efficient defence industry and the subsidies being used for job training elsewhere, particularly in areas of high unemployment. That could be used to train employees for companies willing to locate in areas of high unemployment, that would be better long term.

I read a statistic that if we'd bought F-16's instead of the Typhoon, we'd have enough money 'left over' - i.e. we'd have spent so much less - that the government would have been able to pay the wages of every BAE employee in the UK for the next 30 years and still saved ourselves money in the long run.

Plus you have to understand BAE isn't actually British in any real sense anymore. It effectively decamped to the US years ago because that's where the real money is. It could probably pull out of the UK altogether and it's bottom line wouldn't look all that different. This is the thing that most irritates me about the way UKGov continues to effectively subsidise it by giving it work that could be done better and cheaper by other people - most of the money is in fact going abroad anyway. It may have 'British' on it's headed notepaper but that's about it really.

I'm not happy about people losing their jobs - although there was a huge BAE factory near where I used to live that shut down about a decade ago so it's not really a new thing - but if it's a sign of UKGov 'wiseing up' then frankly I think we'll all be better off for it in the end.

Jon