Retention for Pers Admin

[Shiney Pencil]

We all know the trade is getting smaller and the number of people leaving the trade is not getting any smaller. We need 600 SAC's to fully fill the 1377 quota but 4 out of 10 SAC's at my unit have PVR'd.

I too am going leave in about two years once my MSc is complete as civvy wages seem a lot better. Anybody got any suggestions for retention?

[True Blue Jack]

Retention is not something our lords and masters are looking too closely at because we have far more Sgts than we need if we are to conform to the 'ideal pyramid' that crops up every now and again.

People joining now should be OK because by the time they are competitive for promotion the current turbulence will be ancient history. That said, I joined in the year of Options for Change and I was told the uncertainty faced by 8-year SACs at the time would not be a problem for any of my generation of clerks. They were right, in a way, it's now I am a 15-year Cpl that I am looking ahead to an uncertain future.

[Shiney Pencil]

Retention for SAC's is what I was aiming at, if we need 600 and we have them PVRing left right and centre are we ever gonna get the ideal structure?

[Humble Scribe]

Whilst we do need to lose Sgt's, we also need to retain SAC's. FRI is one suggestion (eg Gunners, FFtrs) or even a strong case from Sec Sponsor to put Cpl's on higher pay band.



.......and before you say it'll never happen, think about the barrier operators!

[KingGuin]

Evening All. A couple of points if I may?

The FMDL is 84% and is forecast to rise. Recruitment is not a problem, why do we need to retain? - discuss.

Cpls on a higher pay band - how would you justify that?

[Shiney Pencil]

Ok recruitment may not be the problem but what about retention of current staff? The only qualification you gain out of PABC is an NVQ 2 in Business Admin, which, to be fair, is pants. Should we not be promoting people to get involved with CIPD stuff??? Not everyone's cup of tea I know but for high calabre individuals accross the rank spectrum could make people think twice before banging out. Any Thoughts?

[Kernow]

Evening All. A couple of points if I may?

The FMDL is 84% and is forecast to rise. Recruitment is not a problem, why do we need to retain? - discuss.

Cpls on a higher pay band - how would you justify that?

Quite simply how I see it is whilst Recruitment may not be a problem where is your experience going to come from for promotions? It's ok topping up the trade but at some point the SACs would become very diluted in terms of experience. Thus leaving you with very slim pickings for prom to cpl. We need to look at how we entice them to stay in (maybe not a 10 grand FRI how about day trip tickets to Thorpe Park!)

[True Blue Jack]

Ok recruitment may not be the problem but what about retention of current staff? The only qualification you gain out of PABC is an NVQ 2 in Business Admin, which, to be fair, is pants. Should we not be promoting people to get involved with CIPD stuff??? Not everyone's cup of tea I know but for high calabre individuals accross the rank spectrum could make people think twice before banging out. Any Thoughts?

I can see a real problem looming in the next 5 years or so if we fail to retain high-calibre administrators, but I don't see how. Putting us onto the higher pay range at any rank level is never going to happen - and the techies were upset enough when RAFP moved up!! Retention incentives a la gunner/firefighter may be useful to retain some SACs but to be frank we need more to retain the experience found at the junior managerial levels (Cpl/Sgt) - the exact levels where we are trying to shed posts.

CIPD is a great qualification but we will never be sponsored as a trade to gain it for 2 reasons: it is very expensive (which is why I am waiting till I qualify for the higher rate ELC to start) and it is too valuable in civvy street. A fully-fledged member of the institute can earn more (sometimes much more) than a WO Pers Admin from the minute he qualifies.

The Institute of Administrative Management may be a good halfway house but I personally don't think it is valuable enough to be a good retention tool.

[Shiney Pencil]

I can see a real problem looming in the next 5 years or so if we fail to retain high-calibre administrators, but I don't see how. Putting us onto the higher pay range at any rank level is never going to happen - and the techies were upset enough when RAFP moved up!! Retention incentives a la gunner/firefighter may be useful to retain some SACs but to be frank we need more to retain the experience found at the junior managerial levels (Cpl/Sgt) - the exact levels where we are trying to shed posts.

CIPD is a great qualification but we will never be sponsored as a trade to gain it for 2 reasons: it is very expensive (which is why I am waiting till I qualify for the higher rate ELC to start) and it is too valuable in civvy street. A fully-fledged member of the institute can earn more (sometimes much more) than a WO Pers Admin from the minute he qualifies.

The Institute of Administrative Management may be a good halfway house but I personally don't think it is valuable enough to be a good retention tool.


Some good points here. I have only been in 5 years and have decided to start a MSc in HRM as a starting point to full CIPD membership. As per usual with the MoD it comes down to cost, although the Institute of Administrative Management might be a good idea. Maybe the trade should look at sponsorship of CIPD and ensure a return of service of 3-5 years, like the officers who go to Uni to get their MSc and have to do a 3 year ROS.

If I was offered full CIPD for a 5 year ROS I would jump at the chance. Again not everyone's cup of tea.

[KingGuin]

Quite simply how I see it is whilst Recruitment may not be a problem where is your experience going to come from for promotions? It's ok topping up the trade but at some point the SACs would become very diluted in terms of experience. Thus leaving you with very slim pickings for prom to cpl. We need to look at how we entice them to stay in (maybe not a 10 grand FRI how about day trip tickets to Thorpe Park!)

K, Let me play Devil's Advocate for a moment. Who are we trying to retain? In my Air Force I would be glad to be rid of dead wood; let's be honest if you can't make Cpl after 6 years service you surely are not as good as those that have done? If, like SP you are already using RAF dosh to feather your nest for the outside world then you are partially out of the door already so do I really want you working for me? That said, what makes a good clerk? - is it experience or the ability to learn? Either or really. Advocacy over.

In my book it's quite simple, you either want to be in or you don't. If you do then you work hard enough to get picked up, if you don't, leave and someone else takes your place. Its been like that since the day I joined and I doubt it will ever change.

[shiny_arse]

K, Let me play Devil's Advocate for a moment. Who are we trying to retain? In my Air Force I would be glad to be rid of dead wood; let's be honest if you can't make Cpl after 6 years service you surely are not as good as those that have done? If, like SP you are already using RAF dosh to feather your nest for the outside world then you are partially out of the door already so do I really want you working for me? That said, what makes a good clerk? - is it experience or the ability to learn? Either or really. Advocacy over.

In my book it's quite simple, you either want to be in or you don't. If you do then you work hard enough to get picked up, if you don't, leave and someone else takes your place. Its been like that since the day I joined and I doubt it will ever change.

KG,

Whereas I agree with you in principal, I cannot relate to the fact that if you can't make Cpl within 6 years you are not as good as others who have. It took me 7.5 years to get my tapes. Aside from the fact that I was in amongst the promotion crawl of the mid 90's, I was receiving good reports, was specifically trawled with 2 others due to positive reporting for VIP duties, regardless of receiving 6 & specs within that world, promotion was still dead and others were getting the pick up. A further 2 reports after VIP duties I was at the end of my tether as what had to be done to get promoted and a career brief was on the cards just before I came off the board at no 2.

There is a load of similar SAC's out there who are an asset to the trade and the RAF. Unfortunately there is also a load of worries about what the future holds for them. As much as the promises out there are stating that career and promotion are going to be maintained unlike the mid 90's, there is still cause for concern that many will be treading water fighting for the same promotion opportunities that their colleagues are chasing.

Some type of recognition needs to be realised in order to keep these people motivated before the dead wood and doom mongerers bring them down.

[Hu Jardon]

K, Let me play Devil's Advocate for a moment. Who are we trying to retain? In my Air Force I would be glad to be rid of dead wood; let's be honest if you can't make Cpl after 6 years service you surely are not as good as those that have done? If, like SP you are already using RAF dosh to feather your nest for the outside world then you are partially out of the door already so do I really want you working for me? That said, what makes a good clerk? - is it experience or the ability to learn? Either or really. Advocacy over.

In my book it's quite simple, you either want to be in or you don't. If you do then you work hard enough to get picked up, if you don't, leave and someone else takes your place. Its been like that since the day I joined and I doubt it will ever change.OR
If you have to offer, or have even got to consider offering, a financial retention incentive to:

Aircrew
Flightcrew
Firemen
Gunners
movers
Admners
Civil Servants
and Uncle Tom Cobley and all

Are you a good employer or have you completely fcuked up?????????????????
Or have you just forgot the techies???????????????

[Cake or Death]

OR
If you have to offer, or have even got to consider offering, a financial retention incentive to:

Aircrew
Flightcrew
Firemen
Gunners
movers
Admners
Civil Servants
and Uncle Tom Cobley and all

Are you a good employer or have you completely fcuked up?????????????????
Or have you just forgot the techies???????????????

ER forgotten the techies Hu!!! Get with it!

Every day on the goat i read about this trade has retention bonuses, and never is it a techie trade. Anyone care to give a reason why as the salt of the earth arent offered anything to keep the air farce flying, aircraft, ge, mt, etc wise?

[Realist78]

ER forgotten the techies Hu!!! Get with it!

Every day on the goat i read about this trade has retention bonuses, and never is it a techie trade. Anyone care to give a reason why as the salt of the earth arent offered anything to keep the air farce flying, aircraft, ge, mt, etc wise?

If I'm not mistaken, That's the very point Hu J is trying to make, given that he's a techie.:PDT_Xtremez_15:

[Man in Black]

Ok recruitment may not be the problem but what about retention of current staff? The only qualification you gain out of PABC is an NVQ 2 in Business Admin, which, to be fair, is pants. Should we not be promoting people to get involved with CIPD stuff??? Not everyone's cup of tea I know but for high calabre individuals accross the rank spectrum could make people think twice before banging out. Any Thoughts?

Not strictly true. During my time Instructing on SecTS (RAF SA as it is now) the learners all achieved the Business Administration Apprenticeship. The NVQ Level 2 was part of this qualification. Granted, it isn't as good as CIPD or IMA, but it is better than just a NVQ Level 2.

Recruitment was never a problem. Retaining the learners we sent out as LACs always was. Once they experienced the real world, a lot did PVR, as it wasn't what they wanted.

Personally I don't think a Financial Incentive is a good idea. Say they were offered an amount for 5 years return of Service, most would take the money, complete the time with minimal effort then leave anyway. We need to look at something more long term that would benefit the individual and the RAF.

[Shiney Pencil]

Not strictly true. During my time Instructing on SecTS (RAF SA as it is now) the learners all achieved the Business Administration Apprenticeship. The NVQ Level 2 was part of this qualification. Granted, it isn't as good as CIPD or IMA, but it is better than just a NVQ Level 2.

Recruitment was never a problem. Retaining the learners we sent out as LACs always was. Once they experienced the real world, a lot did PVR, as it wasn't what they wanted.

Personally I don't think a Financial Incentive is a good idea. Say they were offered an amount for 5 years return of Service, most would take the money, complete the time with minimal effort then leave anyway. We need to look at something more long term that would benefit the individual and the RAF.


Alright the Apprenticeship is ok, but what ideas are there for a long term incentive for retention. I actually like the RAF and the trade as a whole and have experienced a lot of good stuff, but when you are on the board with 6's and specs and missing out everyitme its becomes disheartening! Apart from doing an MSc to help me when I return to civvy street I also hope that it will aid me if I get promoted or decide to go for a commission.

[Rack Shelf Bin]

Whilst we do need to lose Sgt's, we also need to retain SAC's. FRI is one suggestion (eg Gunners, FFtrs) or even a strong case from Sec Sponsor to put Cpl's on higher pay band.


.......and before you say it'll never happen, think about the barrier operators!

Whilst I realise that the reduction of Admin peeps with no reduced work load has led to probs in TG17, my perseption is that this is the case for all trades. As one who is seen by most other trades as people who stack blankets (Duvets now!) or can't get the spares in time I also can see, from this side of the fence, a justification for being moved into the higher pay spine. This will not happen as the MOD are trying to save money so shelling out more on pay will not happen even if there is a problem with retaining people.

[Twisted]

Retention [and recruitment] is a key challenge for most HR practitioners as covered by McKinsey's 'War for Talent'. To be honest with you FRIs, in my experience, do not work. Staff come and staff go - that's life so why increase your financial cost for the risk of no/minimal return? One of the most effective ways to retain staff is to ensure that you have a mutually agreeable physchological contract in place, and therein lies the problem. You need to understand the mindset of the staff you are trying to keep [and this is an age old problem in every workplace, not just the RAF], in this case you are talking of junior administrators who were quite likely born post 1980 [aka the Millennials]. To that end, does the RAF meet the desires of these individuals, I suspect not, but to give you an idea:

As a line manager of a millennial do you:

Provide structure - Define work assignments and success factors;
Provide leadership & guidance - Millennials want to look up to you, learn from you and receive daily feedback from you. They deserve and want your very best investment in time of their success. They want to know the big picture but do you treat them like mushrooms?;
Encourage the millennial's 'can-do' attitude - encourage, don't squash or contain them;
Millennial's are up for challenge and change - They seek ever-changing tasks within their work. Don't bore them, ignore them or dismiss their contribution;
Provide a relaxed, employee-centred workplace - Millennials want to to enjoy their work and workplace.

Millennials whilst loyal will always keep their options open so, as intimated above, the reason that your junior administrators don't want to invest their time in the RAF is probably because their line managers are not investing the time in them.

:PDT_Xtremez_25:

[scaleywife]

As a line manager of a millennial do you:

Provide structure - Define work assignments and success factors;
Provide leadership & guidance - Millennials want to look up to you, learn from you and receive daily feedback from you. They deserve and want your very best investment in time of their success. They want to know the big picture but do you treat them like mushrooms?;
Encourage the millennial's 'can-do' attitude - encourage, don't squash or contain them;
Millennial's are up for challenge and change - They seek ever-changing tasks within their work. Don't bore them, ignore them or dismiss their contribution;
Provide a relaxed, employee-centred workplace - Millennials want to to enjoy their work and workplace.

Millennials whilst loyal will always keep their options open so, as intimated above, the reason that your junior administrators don't want to invest their time in the RAF is probably because their line managers are not investing the time in them.

Off topic - I think you have/are doing the same Open University Social Sciences degree as I am!!! LOL

TBH the problem is that the RAF is an anachronism in todays labour market. Mrs Thatcher gave us the 'freedom' of flexible working and here the RAF sits, a 'job for life' employer in aflexible world. The latest generation don't know how to commit to things as every thing is 'fast and easy'. Thats not a critisism btw, just a fact! It is a fact that the grass is greener mentality has been around since Pontious was a pilot, but it does appear to have got worse in the last 10 years. What incentive will there be to stay in any branch of the RAF whilst the economy is still bouyant.

To solve recruitment/retention problems, create an economic crash and mass unemployment.... you'll be beating them off with the preverbial stick and no-one will want to leave!!

EASY!!!!!!

[MrMasher]

Lets be honest about this subject.
Its not about financial reward is it?
The way I see it is RAF wide, not just shineys.
We are all struggling to get promoted on good assessments.
Why?
Because there is too much dead wood clogging the system up thats why.
Why did the techie redundancies get rid of loads of Cpls? (justification to promote sac (t)'s!!??)
They should have booted out some warrants, flights and chiefs to free the rank ladder up and I expect the other trades were in need of similar bootings!
Why do we insist on having people serving until 55 years of age??
I believe the Army sign for 22 years and if they want more service they can go for their commission? How about some of that action for us. Change the cut off age from 55 to 47. Get the dead wood gone!!!!!

[True Blue Jack]

As it happens, the Army and Navy are going more our way with more and more SSgts and above (Army) and LHs and above (RN) being offered further service beyond 22 years because they have come to recognise how much experience they are losing by kicking out perfectly healthy 40 year olds.

Off Topic I am waiting for someone to challenge the "Age 55" cut off on discrimination grounds.

People, generally, no longer see the Forces as a job for life and the fewer "perks" there are to offset this sustained high operational tempo the harder it is to retain our best people.

[Twisted]

Off Topic
Unfortunately, at the present time, serving members of the armed forces, including reservists, are not covered by the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006. Something to do with the purpose of 'safeguarding national security'.

Statutory regulations might change in the future, but right now the Armed Forces can be as 'ageist' as they like - don't you just love 'loop-holes'

::P:

[Cake or Death]

If I'm not mistaken, That's the very point Hu J is trying to make, given that he's a techie.:PDT_Xtremez_15:

er yeah sorry that made sense to me last night, damn beer. drinking and posting, my bad.

Was supposed to be in agreement.

question is will we ever get a retention bonus?

[woollymouse]

Lets be honest about this subject.
Its not about financial reward is it?
The way I see it is RAF wide, not just shineys.
We are all struggling to get promoted on good assessments.
Why?
Because there is too much dead wood clogging the system up thats why.
Why did the techie redundancies get rid of loads of Cpls? (justification to promote sac (t)'s!!??)
They should have booted out some warrants, flights and chiefs to free the rank ladder up and I expect the other trades were in need of similar bootings!
Why do we insist on having people serving until 55 years of age??
I believe the Army sign for 22 years and if they want more service they can go for their commission? How about some of that action for us. Change the cut off age from 55 to 47. Get the dead wood gone!!!!!

Lose the dead wood that I can agree with but not all those on to 55 are dead wood. Changing the terms of service will not sort out the problem. It's those who are content to sit at Cpl/Sgt/CT/FS level until they get a decent pension who need to be whittled out. That said the Army lose a hell of a lot of good people after 22 years service how would you like to be flung on the scrap heap in your late 30's just because you have provided 22 years service to queen and country from age 18. That is one of the reasons why both the Army and the Navy are looking at the RAF system they have lost valuable personnel and experience.

[MrMasher]

Lose the dead wood that I can agree with but not all those on to 55 are dead wood. Changing the terms of service will not sort out the problem. It's those who are content to sit at Cpl/Sgt/CT/FS level until they get a decent pension who need to be whittled out. That said the Army lose a hell of a lot of good people after 22 years service how would you like to be flung on the scrap heap in your late 30's just because you have provided 22 years service to queen and country from age 18. That is one of the reasons why both the Army and the Navy are looking at the RAF system they have lost valuable personnel and experience.

Surely someone needs to sort out the LUE's and the rank requirement in some posts? Why do some posts require a SNCO where the job can be done by a JNCO for example. Too many SNCO's in the airforce as well as orrificers (a previous thread done at length!)
Perhaps we should keep the experience in the RAF then and sign people on until 65?
In this day and age the RAF can afford to be picky and choosy about who it promotes and who it flings onto the scrapheap. Less people in, less posts to fill and therefore the person for the job has to be the right one.
So when I get to my 22 year point if I havent got my 3rd do I get flung out on the the current system? Even though I will have provided 22 years service to queen and country from age 18?

The Navy and Army get promoted far quicker than some of the RAF trades so the system may not suit them surely?

[SgtScribbly]

couple of points from me on this thread:

To age 55 is just another contract length, same as 22 Yrs and LOS30 and is not necessarily the end of the line as you can always apply for continuance cant you? So its not really discrimating against old people.

FRIs for TG17 - most unlikely, ever,

Higher Pay Band for Cpls - never in a month of sundays

further Civilianisation is the way forward, of that I am sure

[Woodja]

Off Topic
Unfortunately, at the present time, serving members of the armed forces, including reservists, are not covered by the Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006. Something to do with the purpose of 'safeguarding national security'.

Statutory regulations might change in the future, but right now the Armed Forces can be as 'ageist' as they like - don't you just love 'loop-holes'

::P:

So why did they change the "to Age 47" enagagement to LOS30?

Not that I am disputing your post - but they have gone halfway to changing the enagagement terms, why not go the whole way?

[Rack Shelf Bin]

couple of points from me on this thread:

To age 55 is just another contract length, same as 22 Yrs and LOS30 and is not necessarily the end of the line as you can always apply for continuance cant you? So its not really discrimating against old people.

FRIs for TG17 - most unlikely, ever,

Higher Pay Band for Cpls - never in a month of sundays

further Civilianisation is the way forward, of that I am sure

With even less understanding of the service and the idiosyncrasies that there are, but it will always be the poor clerks fault.

[ForgottenName]

Retention is not something our lords and masters are looking too closely at because we have far more Sgts than we need if we are to conform to the 'ideal pyramid' that crops up every now and again. quote]

TBJ. Rather a sweeping statement that. I believe that if our Lords and Masters do not look at retention then we won't have an ideal pyramid, because we won't have any people.

HS

[QUOTE]or even a strong case from Sec Sponsor to put Cpl's on higher pay band

I don't think that any JSET looks at individual ranks, but the trade as a whole. As in any JSET exercise, the proof will be in the evidence provided rather than the strength of the case submitted by a Trade Sponsor.

Shiney Pencil

Should we not be promoting people to get involved with CIPD stuff???

Whilst I believe that we should be promoting personnel to achieve qualifications, at all standards, I believe that we cannot train people to achieve outside qualifications. As many civilian employers have found, you outlay the costs of training people to meet a qualfication then they leave.

TBJ

I can see a real problem looming in the next 5 years or so if we fail to retain high-calibre administrators, but I don't see how

In my opinion you are exactly right. That is why I would not want the job of the Trade Sponsor as he has got to find a way somehow. I, for once, actually have faith in this TS in that he might produce the goods. We have seen some good work coming out - but from my time at STC, I know that he has a hard job ahead of him.

KG

In my Air Force I would be glad to be rid of dead wood

Unfortunately, we both know that there isn't any dead wood out there - at least according to most Fs6000 there aren't. But whose problem is that and how has it come about.

As a KOS scribbly (although I like to believe that I still have a finger on the pulse) with a passionate interest in our trade, I watch the Shiney forum with avid interest. I only wish we could get more Shiney's to read and or join the e-goat forums.

[tommo9999]

There are, and will remain huge issues within TG17. Most have been covered in this thread, but I would really like to see some truly radical proposals; what about removing the promotion link from Further Service? We have all known outstanding SAC's who have never/would never make JNCO that have left because they had to, why not let them do 22 years? What about allowing Cpl's to draft certain trades? It happened in the dim and distant past, it could be a possibility again, particularly now that the Trade Cells have an AST already in place.

I would just like to see some really forward looking, visionary ideas for TG17 or we are finished. Yes, we could last another 10-15 years, but with TRT's in freefall and retention a massive issue, who will stay? The deadwood already mentioned by several posters in this thread. Just give us something, anything to hang our hat on.

[Humble Scribe]

There are, and will remain huge issues within TG17. Most have been covered in this thread, but I would really like to see some truly radical proposals; what about removing the promotion link from Further Service? We have all known outstanding SAC's who have never/would never make JNCO that have left because they had to, why not let them do 22 years? What about allowing Cpl's to draft certain trades? It happened in the dim and distant past, it could be a possibility again, particularly now that the Trade Cells have an AST already in place.

I would just like to see some really forward looking, visionary ideas for TG17 or we are finished. Yes, we could last another 10-15 years, but with TRT's in freefall and retention a massive issue, who will stay? The deadwood already mentioned by several posters in this thread. Just give us something, anything to hang our hat on.

Tommo, I agree with you regarding most of your examples above but the problem would be that things like FS being linked to promotion would have to be adopted for all trade not just TG17 as we're not the only ones with retention problems. FRI's seem to be the vogue for retention at the moment whether it's right or wrong! Personally I like the CIPD option but as FN says we're not going to train personnel to go to civvy street so we need to give our youngsters the potential of a full career with realistic promotion prospects & a rewarding job.

I got my ears burnt last week by a mutual friend about the suggestion that Cpl's draft! The idea filtered down from AMP but ACOS Manning gave me short shrift about it!! Have to keep trying!

[tommo9999]

HS, There is precedent for JNCO's drafting, just ask the really old sweats who were around in the mid-80's. I used the examples to generate debate, I am aware that any proposals could affect other trades, but why not? Lets get everyone discussing these issues, and we might just see some light at the end of the tunnel.

:PDT_Xtremez_30:

[True Blue Jack]

There are, and will remain huge issues within TG17. Most have been covered in this thread, but I would really like to see some truly radical proposals; what about removing the promotion link from Further Service? We have all known outstanding SAC's who have never/would never make JNCO that have left because they had to, why not let them do 22 years? What about allowing Cpl's to draft certain trades? It happened in the dim and distant past, it could be a possibility again, particularly now that the Trade Cells have an AST already in place.

I would just like to see some really forward looking, visionary ideas for TG17 or we are finished. Yes, we could last another 10-15 years, but with TRT's in freefall and retention a massive issue, who will stay? The deadwood already mentioned by several posters in this thread. Just give us something, anything to hang our hat on.

I am a fan of removing the link between rank and length of engagement. I'm sure we all know good people who have fallen off the end of the conveyor belt for no other reason than they have run out of time in a highly competitive era. But we also know eejits who would happily doss around for 22 years letting everybody else carry them, so I think further service beyond that currently allowed by rank should be carefully targetted. It worked a few years ago when a number of Jnr Techs were offered further service to 22, and the Navy are reaping dividends on their "2OE" scheme (5 or 10 years further service for LH & PO approaching the end of their time).

[Humble Scribe]

HS, There is precedent for JNCO's drafting, just ask the really old sweats who were around in the mid-80's. I used the examples to generate debate, I am aware that any proposals could affect other trades, but why not? Lets get everyone discussing these issues, and we might just see some light at the end of the tunnel.

:PDT_Xtremez_30:

You calling me an old sweat Tommo? Fair Point!! Must admit, I worked in the Trade Sqn's in the 80's (along with our mutual friend who was giving me a hard time for the suggestion) as an SAC and I can't remember Cpl's drafting! I know there were some other trades drafting but not, as I recall, Cpl's. Like you say though, lets try and be a bit radical and more away from the norm; I wasn't getting anywhere with the 'mafia' though!!

[tommo9999]

You calling me an old sweat Tommo? I wasn't getting anywhere with the 'mafia' though!!

Yes to answer the first question. On your second point, there's no such thing!!

Back on topic, there were Cpl's drafting in 6D I'm reliably informed, but it might have been before you arrived at Innsworth.

[KingGuin]

Yes to answer the first question. On your second point, there's no such thing!!

Back on topic, there were Cpl's drafting in 6D I'm reliably informed, but it might have been before you arrived at Innsworth.

I remember speaking to a Cpl in 6D who drafted Gunners: this would be around 1988 when I were a lad.

[Mug?]

JPA will have the drafting answers.
You put your preferences in and it sweeps the system for you, job done no human intervention needed, no who you know or wheeling and dealing or sending flowers every month?

The retention question always seems to be answered with the increased recruitment answer, they happy if they can get more in than are flowing out.

Will the new pension arrangements not affect the flow or people, with most leaving at 18 and not holding on to the 22 yrs?

[tommo9999]

JPA will have the drafting answers.
You put your preferences in and it sweeps the system for you, job done no human intervention needed, no who you know or wheeling and dealing or sending flowers every month?

How would JPA pick the right person? Time in location? Disestablished Post? End of Fixed Tour? Interested to hear your thoughts.

[ForgottenName]

JPA will have the drafting answers.
, job done no human intervention needed, ?


Mmmm, an interesting prospect.

Bit like expenses really, then there could be SJAR and ......

[Shiney Pencil]

If you listened to the news yesterday the Armed Forces are now 6000 personnel under strength, but there is not a problem according to the Ivory Towers!

Some good points being raised here and I think that this is the kind of radical thinking that we need. Just got to get those up top to listen to the troops on the ground.

On the note of retention why not get rid of a few Air Officers, they seem to promote them every 2-3 years, then their wages could be used as retention payments. Would be nice!

[vinnyvx]

On the subject of FRI. I understand that the Gnrs and FFtrs got a FRI primarily because of one issue, high PVR rates. A common factor exacerabting their FMDL/PVR rates was the high turn round times for OOA dets, which I believe are much worse than TG17 and virtually all other trades. The other significant factor affecting Fftrs was that there were working alongside Defence Fire Service (DFS) personnel on shift in the UK, and the DFS guys were getting paid significantly more for doing exactly the same job! Gnrs(as do the infantry) get paid a pittance for the work they do OOA, even with the operational allowance. Furthermore, they see their mates leaving to go to very well paid jobs in Iraq and Afghanistan, where they will earn significantly more than if they stayed in. Why get shot at for a pittance when you can get shot at for £70K for 6 months. Hence why Gnrs and FFtrs were awarded a FRI and why at the moment Pers Admin won't be.


I personally think using FRIs is like using a cork to plug a hole in a dam, it won't hold for long unless the fundamental problem is addressed, however it's a cheap, cost effective short term solution. The RAF is broke and it cannot afford a long term fix. If we want to fix the supposedly increasing PVR rate and thus the FMDL in TG17, then as a start I suggest we address the DWR TRT issue. Why do we have over 400 TG17 Sgts and a DWR TRT of every 2 years? Thats a lot of people exempt/sick! I understand drafters are exempt, is it true, anyone I ask in the HQ clams up and won't talk about it. Come on you PMA mafia, what's the score?

I think the Strategic Renumeration Review may also address some of the issues raised here, I understand they'll be more scope to move up THE one pay spine for all, depending on qualifications etc.

As for CIPD. On accrediation of training, of the modules (Law, Managing Business in a Strategic Contect, Managing Information for Competitive Advantage, Managing for Results and managing and Leading People) on the first year of my CIPD course none read accross to any training I initially received on entry in to the RAF, thus I don't think there is scope to accredit the PABC training. I may have a different view after the second year. I'd like to be proved wrong, perhaps the trade sponsor could approach CIPD and discuss the issue, or let us know that its been tried.

I don't susbscribe to the view that some posters have, that just because your furthering your qualifications/professional knowledge that it means your going to leave the RAF or sherk your responsibilities at work. After all the RAF already sends people off on CIPD/CIMA/MA/MSc courses, admittedly they are officers. Perhaps we should give CIPD training to all WOs, they can then disseminate their knowledge down to the troops. If we are to retain people, we need to develop them, CIPD is just another tool, like TMT, JMLC etc. I applied for PVR last Oct and I'm studying for CIPD, I've also just collected another spec rec and I regularly work past 5 on a Friday. I made the decison to leave a long time before I commenced my CIPD.

On the issue of leaving at 55 or earlier. I think the 55 limit will be pushed back, however demographics and the reality will push it back.(We have doctors in their late 50s deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan, if they can do it, why can't you stay in till 60 or 65, especially if you are employed in a benign evironment( Musn, Dental, EHT, Pers Admin etc). Previous posters are correct in saying we are exempt the age regulations, as we are exempt a whole raft of employment law. What the RAF does though is try where it can to adhere to the spirit of the law. This may be as small a measure as changing age 47 to TOS 30.

[True Blue Jack]

I have 7 years left on my current engagement, and I hope to be promoted so I have the option of a further 8 years. I do not intend to leave anytime soon. But I will be starting CIPD next year (once I qualify for the higher rate of ELC). Once I qualify as a graduate member I will weigh up my options and if I can double my salary by leaving then I may just forgo my immediate pension. Or I may not. There is no reason for the RAF to make my life easier by gifting me the option particularly since, as you say, CIPD is aimed at civvy HR managers and is not directly related to the Pers Admin trade (at our level anyway).

[Shiny_Happy]

I am currently a Cpl Pers Admin, and want to stay in the RAF as long as possible. I certainly want to complete whatever engagement I end up on as far as my promotion goes - hopefully that will be age 55. The problem is that there is so much uncertainty about our trade, made all the worse by the endless rumours. There are a few threads within this forum that are on vaguely the same lines as one another. There is a direct link between this 'retention' thread and the 'future of TG17' thread. Will there be a TG17 to retain people in? I certainly think so. It will be a different TG17 to the one we joined, but I refuse to believe that the trade as a whole will vanish. I hope I am right.

I am one of the most committed people I know, but I am looking over the fence to civvy street. Why? Because I am young enough to start another career, and the RAF isn't guaranteeting to offer me one within. Why should I limp on in the dark for 1,2,3,4 years? waiting for someone to announce the results of the admin end to end study. 3-4 years down the line I will no longer be as competetive with the young thrusters who are right now looking at the same jobs as me on civvy street.

If you want to retain quality people, reassure them. It doesn't have to be good news, I would rather be given bad news that I can react to and deal with than be given no news at all and kept in limbo, which is what is happening now. There will never be a problem retaining the dross - most of them realise that they would never get a job with comparable renumeration on civvy street. Many of us know that we could. To retain us, offer us the chance of a career, or at least manage our expectations with realistic facts about trade size, promotion opportunites etc, so that we can make informed decisions.

Rant over - God I feel better having gotten that off of my chest!

[Boarderlyne]

With TBJ and SH on this one. Got 5 to do and I leave as a two banana unless I win the prom lottery and get to add another rocker to my shoulder. Would love to hear what the full story is and no flannel as I fully intend to stay in and work for the shirt that I wear with pride. Agree that the wasters will always stay in, but give the workers something to work with!

[tommo9999]

As has been said yet again, we just want some gen. Good, bad or indifferent doesn't matter, it just gives us something on which to base a decision. The whole of TG17 is waiting to hear what's going on, we thought APC 07 may have shed some light, but as those who were there will testify, it absolutely did not.

[Humble Scribe]

As has been said yet again, we just want some gen. Good, bad or indifferent doesn't matter, it just gives us something on which to base a decision. The whole of TG17 is waiting to hear what's going on, we thought APC 07 may have shed some light, but as those who were there will testify, it absolutely did not.

I indeed testify this statement but we were further told that July would be the month that we would find out! I keep hearing that the TS is a top fellow, and have no reason to doubt it, but FFS, people's careers are standing still waiting for some 'Gen'. We can't be fobbed off much longer with, "its with the AFB" sh!t. We deserve some answers and quickly!!

[True Blue Jack]

I indeed testify this statement but we were further told that July would be the month that we would find out! I keep hearing that the TS is a top fellow, and have no reason to doubt it, but FFS, people's careers are standing still waiting for some 'Gen'. We can't be fobbed off much longer with, "its with the AFB" sh!t. We deserve some answers and quickly!!

But since we have waited this long, I think we should let the Cpl - Sgt board be ratified and the top few released to the PSL before we hear anything. Just in case. :PDT_Xtremez_31:

[Kernow]

As has been said yet again, we just want some gen. Good, bad or indifferent doesn't matter, it just gives us something on which to base a decision. The whole of TG17 is waiting to hear what's going on, we thought APC 07 may have shed some light, but as those who were there will testify, it absolutely did not.

I indeed testify this statement but we were further told that July would be the month that we would find out! I keep hearing that the TS is a top fellow, and have no reason to doubt it, but FFS, people's careers are standing still waiting for some 'Gen'. We can't be fobbed off much longer with, "its with the AFB" sh!t. We deserve some answers and quickly!!


Actually it is with the cleaning lady at the mo!

I have said in another thread that we need answers now not sit on our hands and wait. Even a quick brief (official one not bar chat) on where the review is going in terms of recommendations to be signed off would have been nice rather than as HS has said 'with the AFB' and 'I wouldn't like to say at this present moment'.

[tommo9999]

Off Topic Expecting to be in the top few then TBJ? Wasn't sure we were that short in TG17!!Off Topic

:PDT_Xtremez_30:

[True Blue Jack]

Off Topic Expecting to be in the top few then TBJ? Wasn't sure we were that short in TG17!!Off Topic

:PDT_Xtremez_30:

I did say "Just in case". :PDT_Xtremez_30: I don't care if I'm 1st or 50th, but I hope to be in with a shout, if only because Bitte Ein Bit put so much effort into my last couple of appraisals it won't be fair to him if I don't get picked up. :PDT_Xtremez_31:

[tommo9999]

I did say "Just in case". :PDT_Xtremez_30: I don't care if I'm 1st or 50th, but I hope to be in with a shout, if only because Bitte Ein Bit put so much effort into my last couple of appraisals it won't be fair to him if I don't get picked up. :PDT_Xtremez_31:

Off Topic Let's hope he wasn't on the Bit when he wrote it!! Good luck, I'm sure you'll go well.Off Topic

[Humble Scribe]

I did say "Just in case". :PDT_Xtremez_30: I don't care if I'm 1st or 50th, but I hope to be in with a shout, if only because Bitte Ein Bit put so much effort into my last couple of appraisals it won't be fair to him if I don't get picked up. :PDT_Xtremez_31:

Off Topic He told me he'd written his own for the last 3 years and look where that's got him!!

[tommo9999]

I have been reliably informed that there have been Cpl drafters in the past, but it was so long ago that only Humble Scribe and Forgotten name will remember them!! The last ones left the Trade Squadrons around 1974/75 I'm told.

[Humble Scribe]

I have been reliably informed that there have been Cpl drafters in the past, but it was so long ago that only Humble Scribe and Forgotten name will remember them!! The last ones left the Trade Squadrons around 1974/75 I'm told.

Reliable!! Any fecker that old must be suffering from Alzheimers! Probably KG though as he can remember speaking to a Cpl drafter in 1988!

[KingGuin]

Reliable!! Any fecker that old must be suffering from Alzheimers! Probably KG though as he can remember speaking to a Cpl drafter in 1988!

Cheeky young fecker! Just cos I smell of p**s and digestive biscuits these days doesn't mean I can't remember my own name. Actually the afore-mentioned Cpl drafter (a FS last time I spoke to him) spent many years hiding in AFPAA frighted of the Gnrs whose lives he (allegedy) ruined.

[Bitte ein Bit!]

Off Topic He told me he'd written his own for the last 3 years and look where that's got him!!

Just back on-line following my deportation, I mean repat from Belgium. Writing you own report might sound good, but if you have got Army officers in your reporting chain then you can definately kiss your ass goodbye when it comes to the board!

Enjoy Germany HS - shame about Terry Henry though!:PDT_Xtremez_30:

[Humble Scribe]

Enjoy Germany HS - shame about Terry Henry though!:PDT_Xtremez_30:

Off Topic Won't miss his va va voom as much as your lot'll miss Tevez!! Always welcome for a game of Golf or a Cricket tour BEB!

[Bitte ein Bit!]

Off Topic Won't miss his va va voom as much as your lot'll miss Tevez!! Always welcome for a game of Golf or a Cricket tour BEB!


It ain't over yet..... Got a feeling the Tevez transfer is going to run and run. Anyway, we have now got that shy and retiring Welshman (sounds familair that) to replace him.

Might take you up on the offer one day though.

Enjoy.

[TrebleB]

let's be honest if you can't make Cpl after 6 years service you surely are not as good as those that have done?

Am I glad you are not in charge - it took me 12 years to get to Cpl!!

Not by being a bad 'un or by being a bad clerk - I was on a unit where one bloke sat at the same desk for eight years solid, and got his tapes for doing the same job.

I went and saw the Falklands and did every admin job on my unit in my rank for the same amount of time and got squit!

It was only thanks to the F6000 introduction that someone noticed me!

AS for retaining our trade, we need to take a hard look at what exactly our role is since the travesty that is JPA has been thrust upon us.

I work in a Sqn Admin Office that has devolved functionality of everything except PVRs and Promotion/Further Service. My Sneck is on a 4monther overseas and I am the only one in the office (I don't count the 2 Army Snecks and the 2 Army Lance Jacks - Jointery???)

I am expected to do it all - my SAC was disestablished (thanks JPA) and so I am, in effect, a PD Clerk again - why did I get promoted.......?

We do need to retain, but we also need to distribute the manpower to where it is needed and we cannot rely on our sister services to make the purple clerk rubbish work - because it won't.

[BlahBlah]

In addition to what TrebleB said reference KG comments. I am a 7 year SAC, work in a PSF and have had 6 specs for the last 4 years. My position on the board has been high for the last 2 years, but not high enough, last year i was 3 below what they picked up and this year I am pretty much the same. I really do love my job and like to think that I am quite good at it, I have worn A/Cpl tapes for the last 2 years on and off (more on than off) but am very well aware that "real" promotion could still be years off.

What is more disillusioning is every year more and more SAC's enter the promotion field. What I am doing wrong God only knows but the Cpl we got in our place on promotion has been in 4 years, worked in VIP (same job) since being an LAC and knows diddly squat about JPA or the trade in general! I on the other hand have had more jobs than i care to remember (none VIP interestingly enough) and recognition seems to be non existent!!

So retention for Pers Admin in my eyes seems bleak. I have not PVR'd and really do not wish to, as I said i really do enjoy my job (a rarity I have found). However, time marches on, I am lucky enough to have a degree behind me (Open University in my spare time!!) so if promotion is not forthcoming then I will bail after my 9 years when maybe I can get a job where my dedication is recognised!

Rant over....

[KingGuin]

[QUOTE=BlahBlah;147830]In addition to what TrebleB said reference KG comments. QUOTE]

I feel much maligned. Please read my comments again - I was playing Devil's Advocate. As for working for me - that's nice and easy: if you are good you get a good ACR, if you are pants, and remain so despite me telling you, you get a not-so-good ACR.

Additionally, regardless of rank or trade everyone knows at least one tw*t who has been promoted whom, in their opinion, did not deserve it. Indeed I am sure there are many who would say the same about me!

As an aside, any news on the Trade Review? I am currently overseas and bereft of info.

[Kernow]

[QUOTE=BlahBlah;147830]In addition to what TrebleB said reference KG comments. QUOTE]

I feel much maligned. Please read my comments again - I was playing Devil's Advocate. As for working for me - that's nice and easy: if you are good you get a good ACR, if you are pants, and remain so despite me telling you, you get a not-so-good ACR.

Additionally, regardless of rank or trade everyone knows at least one tw*t who has been promoted whom, in their opinion, did not deserve it. Indeed I am sure there are many who would say the same about me!

As an aside, any news on the Trade Review? I am currently overseas and bereft of info.

Apparently it is due to be published this week. I'm sure they have said that before though and then put it back.

[tommo9999]

Let's hope the announcement provides a viable future for the Trade. I think lots of us would wish to stay, but we need a change of structure. Here's hoping for good news.

[Kernow]

Let's hope the announcement provides a viable future for the Trade. I think lots of us would wish to stay, but we need a change of structure. Here's hoping for good news.

Second that sentiment, it has been easy to get quite excited (not in a good way) with every rumour flying around.

Off Topic Hows the weather darn sarf at the mo, take it, it was a smooth ride?

[tommo9999]

Off Topic

Weather is okay today, but there have been a couple of shockers since I arrived. Flight down was a nightmare, stuck at ASI in the cage for 9 hours because of high winds in MPA.

Off Topic

[Boarderlyne]

In addition to what TrebleB said reference KG comments. I am a 7 year SAC, work in a PSF and have had 6 specs for the last 4 years. My position on the board has been high for the last 2 years, but not high enough, last year i was 3 below what they picked up and this year I am pretty much the same. I really do love my job and like to think that I am quite good at it, I have worn A/Cpl tapes for the last 2 years on and off (more on than off) but am very well aware that "real" promotion could still be years off.

What is more disillusioning is every year more and more SAC's enter the promotion field. What I am doing wrong God only knows but the Cpl we got in our place on promotion has been in 4 years, worked in VIP (same job) since being an LAC and knows diddly squat about JPA or the trade in general! I on the other hand have had more jobs than i care to remember (none VIP interestingly enough) and recognition seems to be non existent!!

So retention for Pers Admin in my eyes seems bleak. I have not PVR'd and really do not wish to, as I said i really do enjoy my job (a rarity I have found). However, time marches on, I am lucky enough to have a degree behind me (Open University in my spare time!!) so if promotion is not forthcoming then I will bail after my 9 years when maybe I can get a job where my dedication is recognised!

Rant over....Know how you feel. Took me 11 years to get my two banana but the harsh reality is that we now have a lot of good people competing for the same slots. A fellow 2 banana got his third last year after 1 High and 4 Specs and I chuffed to bits for him as he is a good lad, but another has the same amount of Highs and Specs but only barely got a sniff this year. To many of us that haven't seen how a promotion board works, it seems to be a bit of a black art until it is explained (still seems to be a black art! :PDT_Xtremez_30: ) but when you talk to a Snec that has had his third for longer than I spent as a SAC and has had more Specs that I could believe and he's struggling to get his crown, then it goes to show how tough it is to get ahead. Hopefully, the new SJAR will stop assessment creep and aid us in getting ahead, but with the drawdown, I am not hopeful of promotion picking up in time for me to get my third banana and I so wanted to get my pipe and slippers! :PDT_Xtremez_27:

[Kernow]

Know how you feel. Took me 11 years to get my two banana but the harsh reality is that we now have a lot of good people competing for the same slots. A fellow 2 banana got his third last year after 1 High and 4 Specs and I chuffed to bits for him as he is a good lad, but another has the same amount of Highs and Specs but only barely got a sniff this year. To many of us that haven't seen how a promotion board works, it seems to be a bit of a black art until it is explained (still seems to be a black art! :PDT_Xtremez_30: ) but when you talk to a Snec that has had his third for longer than I spent as a SAC and has had more Specs that I could believe and he's struggling to get his crown, then it goes to show how tough it is to get ahead. Hopefully, the new SJAR will stop assessment creep and aid us in getting ahead, but with the drawdown, I am not hopeful of promotion picking up in time for me to get my third banana and I so wanted to get my pipe and slippers! :PDT_Xtremez_27:

Unfortunately, I don't think that will be the case. The F6000 was supposed to stop the assessment creep when it was introduced, but as we see now it hasn't. Is there a sure fire way of doing it, I don't know and TBH I don't think anyone else really does. You could take away the scoring part whether it is 1-6 or D-A, but the write-ups will always be inflated regardless.

[KingGuin]

Unfortunately, I don't think that will be the case. The F6000 was supposed to stop the assessment creep when it was introduced, but as we see now it hasn't. Is there a sure fire way of doing it, I don't know and TBH I don't think anyone else really does. You could take away the scoring part whether it is 1-6 or D-A, but the write-ups will always be inflated regardless.

I have said previously I am a big fan of the ACR and I hope it works. Nonetheless if I had it within my gift (and in an ideal world) I would:
1. Promulgate widely pre-boarding, boarding and prom placing. No speculation, rumour, just hard facts.
2. Re-introduce a Promex - thus, in theory, every candidate for promotion should have the same knowledge base. (Remember it's only a theory)

Failing that I would, if only to have a swing (see earlier post) at some tw*t who got promoted ahead of me, put everyone in a ring and award promotion to the last one standing.

Mind you with the Trade review imminent you could all come round to my house for a brew and we could decide amongst ourselves. :PDT_Xtremez_19:

[True Blue Jack]

I have said previously I am a big fan of the ACR and I hope it works. Nonetheless if I had it within my gift (and in an ideal world) I would:
1. Promulgate widely pre-boarding, boarding and prom placing. No speculation, rumour, just hard facts.
2. Re-introduce a Promex - thus, in theory, every candidate for promotion should have the same knowledge base. (Remember it's only a theory)

Failing that I would, if only to have a swing (see earlier post) at some tw*t who got promoted ahead of me, put everyone in a ring and award promotion to the last one standing.

Mind you with the Trade review imminent you could all come round to my house for a brew and we could decide amongst ourselves. :PDT_Xtremez_19:

I've always been a fan of promotion exams because it is always difficult when you get a new Snec in PSF who has never worked in the PFA before (reminds me of my first Chf Clk who, as a WO, was doing his first PSF tour ever). But that's the problem - our trade is employed in such diverse areas that you couldn't cover all bases in a promex and to cover PFA only would disadvantage those who - through no fault of their own - have only worked in other areas.

I think we should organise a TG17 get-together after the implementation of the trade review. There's a phone box near me that will do the job just nicely. :PDT_Xtremez_42:

On your other point - will more transparency in the promotion boarding process be of any benefit? Once upon a time you only knew you were to be promoted when your boss gave you your blue letter. Now we have access to all kinds of information about pre-board grading, position on the ratified PSL, etc., which I believe is largely responsible for 'assessment creep'. More information will not ensure that promotion goes to those who have done the most to earn it, but will continue to go to those who have the best narratives.

[Realist78]

I've always been a fan of promotion exams because it is always difficult when you get a new Snec in PSF who has never worked in the PFA before (reminds me of my first Chf Clk who, as a WO, was doing his first PSF tour ever). But that's the problem - our trade is employed in such diverse areas that you couldn't cover all bases in a promex and to cover PFA only would disadvantage those who - through no fault of their own - have only worked in other areas.

I think we should organise a TG17 get-together after the implementation of the trade review. There's a phone box near me that will do the job just nicely. :PDT_Xtremez_42:

On your other point - will more transparency in the promotion boarding process be of any benefit? Once upon a time you only knew you were to be promoted when your boss gave you your blue letter. Now we have access to all kinds of information about pre-board grading, position on the ratified PSL, etc., which I believe is largely responsible for 'assessment creep'. More information will not ensure that promotion goes to those who have done the most to earn it, but will continue to go to those who have the best narratives.

Until somebody comes up with a more equitable method than ACR aided promotions, is a well written narrative not fair? Just a question.

[True Blue Jack]

Until somebody comes up with a more equitable method than ACR aided promotions, is a well written narrative not fair? Just a question.

When it is deserved, yes. When it is artificially inflated, e.g., listing a ream of non-existant associated/secondary duties with the express intent of giving the subject a better chance of promotion, no. Trust me, if every appraisal that crosses my desk is accurate then my Sqn must have over 200 toolkits and each service vehicle is DI'd by half a dozen mechs.

[Realist78]

When it is deserved, yes. When it is artificially inflated, e.g., listing a ream of non-existant associated/secondary duties with the express intent of giving the subject a better chance of promotion, no. Trust me, if every appraisal that crosses my desk is accurate then my Sqn must have over 200 toolkits and each service vehicle is DI'd by half a dozen mechs.


Couldn't agree more as I have about 50 scout leaders, 25 football coaches etc etc. The thing is, when I get one across my desk (wuff wuff) with that sh1te on and I know that it's all b0llocks, back to the 1st RO it goes. I also put a tips sheet in when they are issued to avoid things like "...is actively seeking a meaningful secondary duty etc" and the feckers want extra kudos for that? No way, tip sheet says that if they were..they would have found one by now! Unfortunately, some 1st ROs don't filter the bullsh1t or they believe the sh1te they are given by the subject. There's no easy answer I'm afraid.:PDT_Xtremez_17:

[BlahBlah]

This has just been released reference the Trade Review:-

Ladies/Gents



1. By now you will all have been expecting an announcement in respect of the Branch & Trade Review. The following is an extract from the soon to be released Aug 07 Personnel Bulletin.



UPDATE ON 10% STRETCH TARGET FOR ADMIN SPECIALISATION



A decision was reached by the Air Force Board Standing Committee recently on the 10% stretch target for the Admin Specialisation Branch and Trade (B&T). However, further higher level staffing work is required so no completion time is available at present. Once detail has been received by the B&T Sponsor, it will be issued immediately to the B&T Specialisation.



2. Clearly this will be a disappointment to you and everyone in the Branch & Trade. I am well aware of the impact that this is having at unit level but I can assure you that everything is being done to release the detail and findings as soon as possible. Neither the A1 Spec Supt Team nor Air Manning are in a position to advise you any further at this stage.





D** *****



D *****



So the wait goes on............

[Kernow]

This has just been released reference the Trade Review:-

Ladies/Gents



1. By now you will all have been expecting an announcement in respect of the Branch & Trade Review. The following is an extract from the soon to be released Aug 07 Personnel Bulletin.



UPDATE ON 10% STRETCH TARGET FOR ADMIN SPECIALISATION



A decision was reached by the Air Force Board Standing Committee recently on the 10% stretch target for the Admin Specialisation Branch and Trade (B&T). However, further higher level staffing work is required so no completion time is available at present. Once detail has been received by the B&T Sponsor, it will be issued immediately to the B&T Specialisation.



2. Clearly this will be a disappointment to you and everyone in the Branch & Trade. I am well aware of the impact that this is having at unit level but I can assure you that everything is being done to release the detail and findings as soon as possible. Neither the A1 Spec Supt Team nor Air Manning are in a position to advise you any further at this stage.





D** *****



D *****



So the wait goes on............

Twas to be expected. Oh well plod on as usual.

[tommo9999]

Yup, it's a case of Ready, Steady, Wait once again. I'm sure things are not easy for them, but this is beyond any semblance of a joke now.

[Shiny_Happy]

Perhaps they are waiting for 10% of us to get pi55ed of enough to PVR. Hey presto, stretch target met with no nasty redundancies to hit the newspaper headlines

[skevans]

a strong case from Sec Sponsor to put Cpl's on higher pay band.

Sounds like nonsense to me.

You have a problem retaining SAC's not Cpl's

Whatever the problems are within your trade, promotion to Cpl is unlikely IMHO to be the reason why SAC's are leaving in droves.

So why do you think that increasing Cpl pay will encourage SAC's to stay?

[BlahBlah]

Sounds like nonsense to me.

You have a problem retaining SAC's not Cpl's

Whatever the problems are within your trade, promotion to Cpl is unlikely IMHO to be the reason why SAC's are leaving in droves.

So why do you think that increasing Cpl pay will encourage SAC's to stay?

It does seem that the reason SAC's are leaving in droves is, in part, down to promotion. Also with the continuing frustrations with JPA (well more the JPAC) more pressure is being piled on SAC's to get what seems to be a never ending job done. At 80% manning forecast in Dec 07 (augusts chf clks bulletin) it is not looking at getting better.

With the trade review being due for what seems the last 2 years the future is so uncertain. Will promotion ever pick up? What jobs are they going to cut? and why on earth is it taking so long?

As for Cpls being put on the higher pay band, I do not think this will ever happen and as for retention of SAC's this "carrott" would not make me stay if I had made the decision to leave. In fact it would probably make me more resentful of those idiots who get promoted after 4 years, are complete t**ts and incompentent and need to be carried by the SAC's on the lower pay scale. IMHO this would probably increase the PVR rate among SAC's rather than reduce it!!

[KingGuin]

This has just been released reference the Trade Review:-

Ladies/Gents



1. By now you will all have been expecting an announcement in respect of the Branch & Trade Review. The following is an extract from the soon to be released Aug 07 Personnel Bulletin.



UPDATE ON 10% STRETCH TARGET FOR ADMIN SPECIALISATION



A decision was reached by the Air Force Board Standing Committee recently on the 10% stretch target for the Admin Specialisation Branch and Trade (B&T). However, further higher level staffing work is required so no completion time is available at present. Once detail has been received by the B&T Sponsor, it will be issued immediately to the B&T Specialisation.



2. Clearly this will be a disappointment to you and everyone in the Branch & Trade. I am well aware of the impact that this is having at unit level but I can assure you that everything is being done to release the detail and findings as soon as possible. Neither the A1 Spec Supt Team nor Air Manning are in a position to advise you any further at this stage.





D** *****



D *****



So the wait goes on............

BB did this come from A1 Spec Sup? In my real job I would have seen this but alas in my temp purple home....................

[BlahBlah]

KG indeed it did!! It was e-mailed to Chf Clks yesterday and has been published in August Chf Clk's bulletin which has been released today.

[busbyboy]

BB did this come from A1 Spec Sup? In my real job I would have seen this but alas in my temp purple home....................


KG, I do hope you will avoid the bling jewellery out there. Don't want to get any of those tacky "necklaces", won't do at all...!

Still waiting on my SCV payment, btw, Ming Campbell has a certain ring to it as your (and my) local MP.

Moving to Broughty Ferry next week - DE will be glad.

Regards,

[muttywhitedog]

[QUOTE=True Blue Jack;128089]Retention is not something our lords and masters are looking too closely at because we have far more Sgts than we need if we are to conform to the 'ideal pyramid' that crops up every now and again.QUOTE]

Perhaps if our lords & masters had allowed the "unlucky" 90 or so Sgts who applied but didnt get the Big R to leave, albeit on 18 months' notice of Redundancy, in Apr 08, they would achieve their pyramid.

[Bitte ein Bit!]

[Perhaps if our lords & masters had allowed the "unlucky" 90 or so Sgts who applied but didnt get the Big R to leave, albeit on 18 months' notice of Redundancy, in Apr 08, they would achieve their pyramid.[/QUOTE]

As one of the 'unlucky 90' I believe that to be a damn fine idea. However, one of the reasons we didin't get selected is that we are fit (alledgedly!) and are able to deploy unlike some of the 'lame' (not all admittedly) that actually got it. Imagine what the DWR turnaround would be like with another 90 out of the pot - about 18 months and below Harmony at best I would guess.

[busby1971]

all[/U] admittedly) that actually got it. Imagine what the DWR turnaround would be like with another 90 out of the pot - about 18 months and below Harmony at best I would guess.

So you think that after we've got rid of the 133 posts our trade will maintain a harmony turnaround with regard DWR's, don't think so.

I remember a while back being told, around the time of options, that our trade was now at the level required to support ops, provide harmony and support back to those at base. Having now been cut by a healthy 30% you can kiss your a55 good bye to harmony, hello to Afganistan quick turnaround, and if your a 1S or 5S a quick kiss between dets.

Promotion has been at a relative standstill since Mid 2003 for Cpls and will continue for some time to come as we form a pyramid, I'm sorry I'm not aware of the effects on the other ranks as I am not one of them but it's probably similar, good luck to those that are left behind they'll need it, I've made my bed and set my own future up I'm a better person than I was when I joined up, partly due to the opportunities given to me, so I am not bitter, honest, but I feel sorry for those that expected what they were told when they joined up, not aware of the politics and penny pinching related manning in the RAF.

[tommo9999]

Promotion has been at a relative standstill since Mid 2003 for Cpls

Relative to what? Although I don't have the figures currently to hand, I can remember making offers to very healthy numbers in 02, 03, 04 and 05. It only really got tight in my last 12-18 months in the job. I would say that, on average, the Cpl - Sgt PSL over the 02-05 period used approx 50-70 each year (I can certainly remember getting to the late 60's on at least 2 occasions). It's a myth that there has been no promotion for "ages" as some say.

[busby1971]

Relative to what? Although I don't have the figures currently to hand, I can remember making offers to very healthy numbers in 02, 03, 04 and 05. It only really got tight in my last 12-18 months in the job. I would say that, on average, the Cpl - Sgt PSL over the 02-05 period used approx 50-70 each year (I can certainly remember getting to the late 60's on at least 2 occasions). It's a myth that there has been no promotion for "ages" as some say.

I know you're an expert here, what with your last job and all that, but from my own personal experience over this period I've been in the thirties twice and yoyo'd up into the sixties twice so if you're right somebody made a big boo boo and I've got good reasons for a redress, however, I think you may have forgotten the exact figures and might be working on averages which would have included the huge promotion board, that I just missed out on, in 2002 that was extended because of telic and got into triple figures, I was bang in there in 2003 which was a short board because of the 2002 one and got to the mid 60's, still a good figure considering the shortness of period covered.

You regularly hear people going on about how promotion is near normal, and when they justify this they compare it by using averages that include 02 or relate it to the period before the mid 90s redundancy period when promotion just wasn't there.

Jobs get cut promotions get rarer, that's to be expected that's the way life is, just don't Cowpoo everyone with stats that don't relate to what really happens on the shop floor

[tommo9999]

I'll try and get the figures, but I don't remember going anywhere near 3 figures. Give me a couple of days, I'll get back to you.

[vinnyvx]

I'll try and get the figures, but I don't remember going anywhere near 3 figures. Give me a couple of days, I'll get back to you.

This site will provide some of the TG17 promotion figures that were being discussed.

http://www.pma.innsworth.raf.r.mil.uk/live/Manning/22c-Promotions/GroundTrades.htm

[vinnyvx]

[Perhaps if our lords & masters had allowed the "unlucky" 90 or so Sgts who applied but didnt get the Big R to leave, albeit on 18 months' notice of Redundancy, in Apr 08, they would achieve their pyramid.

[/QUOTE]As one of the 'unlucky 90' I believe that to be a damn fine idea. However, one of the reasons we didin't get selected is that we are fit (alledgedly!) and are able to deploy unlike some of the 'lame' (not all admittedly) that actually got it. Imagine what the DWR turnaround would be like with another 90 out of the pot - about 18 months and below Harmony at best I would guess.[/QUOTE]


.........


In another job I was heavily involved in staffing the redundancy policy. The reason why we didn't make more people redundant, not just in TG17 was that the treasury only gave the RAF funding to make 2750 personnel redundant. If more money had been available we would have been at 41K personnel some time ago.

The Treasury told the RAF after the mid nineties redundancy round to reduce its overly generous redundancy terms. We didn't, it fell through the cracks! Hence why we only got funding for 2750 redundancies and the subsequent change in the redundancy regs.

I was one of the unlucky ones as well, fit and at the wrong end of the reverse promotion board!

[muttywhitedog]

Ditto, however how long is it going to take to shed all these posts through "natural wastage", particularly those of us who have >10yrs left on our contract. The terms of the redundancy would have given me 18 months pay - it would still be cost-effective if someone was to write to those who didnt get it and offer them it again. 18months salary versus 8, 9, 10 yrs is a no-brainer really, and they could have their beautiful pyramid.

Hell, if they did that, I'll even throw a crayon in so that ACOS A1 can colour it in and frame it!

[vinnyvx]

Ditto, however how long is it going to take to shed all these posts through "natural wastage", particularly those of us who have >10yrs left on our contract. The terms of the redundancy would have given me 18 months pay - it would still be cost-effective if someone was to write to those who didnt get it and offer them it again. 18months salary versus 8, 9, 10 yrs is a no-brainer really, and they could have their beautiful pyramid.

Hell, if they did that, I'll even throw a crayon in so that ACOS A1 can colour it in and frame it!

I understand fully what your saying. However, it simply costs too much to make people redundant at the moment (upto 19 months pay and in all probability a pension and a lump sum). Instead you reduce promotion flows, which pushes up the natural wastage outflow. You may not like like it, but its cheap and effective, admittedly it has a sizeable obvious downside. You've got to bear in mind that inflation in the equipment programme outstrips any defence budget increases, hence defence funding has always been tighter than a nats chuff. Redundancy payments aren't top of the list of things to spend funds on, and rightly so. New AT/SH airframes, SLAM, SFA upgrades, better pay, medical/dental provision etc are well above it.

I suppose you could stop re-engagement/extensions of service in the rank with the surplus to help the situation, however you'll only upset another group of people.

[busby1971]

however you'll only upset another group of people.

And which group of people are left to upset...

[busby1971]

This site will provide some of the TG17 promotion figures that were being discussed.

http://www.pma.innsworth.raf.r.mil.uk/live/Manning/22c-Promotions/GroundTrades.htm

These partial figures seem to back up what I was saying about the 'relatively' few promotion prospects recently. The SAC figure for 2004 was probably high because they would have been replacing a lot of the Cpls promoted on the 2003 board I guess.

In Thommo's defence when I spoke to him, in his last job, he was honest (as a drafter can be) and told it like it was, no promises just a little bit of hope.

[Bitte ein Bit!]

I understand fully what your saying. However, it simply costs too much to make people redundant at the moment (upto 19 months pay and in all probability a pension and a lump sum). Instead you reduce promotion flows, which pushes up the natural wastage outflow. You may not like like it, but its cheap and effective, admittedly it has a sizeable obvious downside. You've got to bear in mind that inflation in the equipment programme outstrips any defence budget increases, hence defence funding has always been tighter than a nats chuff. Redundancy payments aren't top of the list of things to spend funds on, and rightly so. New AT/SH airframes, SLAM, SFA upgrades, better pay, medical/dental provision etc are well above it.

I suppose you could stop re-engagement/extensions of service in the rank with the surplus to help the situation, however you'll only upset another group of people.

vinnyvx - I think you hit the nail on the head with the bit about 'forcing' natural wastage. I don't know many of the lads who joined up with me (late 80's) that can really see any long term future. To a man they are just counting down until either the 18 month point or their 21 year point before they bang in their paperwork. Working on that group of people as 'natural wastage' then our lords and masters will get their perfect pyramid sooner than they think but at the expense of losing alot of very experienced guys who have got fed up waiting for a non-forthcoming promotion and a two year DWR TRT.

[vinnyvx]

vinnyvx - I think you hit the nail on the head with the bit about 'forcing' natural wastage. I don't know many of the lads who joined up with me (late 80's) that can really see any long term future. To a man they are just counting down until either the 18 month point or their 21 year point before they bang in their paperwork. Working on that group of people as 'natural wastage' then our lords and masters will get their perfect pyramid sooner than they think but at the expense of losing alot of very experienced guys who have got fed up waiting for a non-forthcoming promotion and a two year DWR TRT.

I wouldn't say it's forcing natural wastage as its perjorative. Natural wastage is a by product produced at different levels by certain manning levers. The RAF would be mad to promote a lot people into a rank with a surplus because that causes problems, however you need to keep promotion flowing, albeit at a lower level than the historical norm to keep a glimmer of hope alive and retain the very best of that years board. I know the TS is trying to make the best of a bad situation. The muppets who decided on the original 20% JPA saving are the people who need a kicking. They had an ideal opportunity to reshape the pyramid, they didn't because they were inept. I know most of them introduced JPA and left on redundancy.

I PVR'd at 12 months prior to my 22 point, even though I was an A grade candidate. The grass is definitely greener outside for me at the moment. 4.5 months to do!

Check these sites out for HR jobs:

www.reed.co.uk
www.totaljobs.com
www.monster.com

[Bitte ein Bit!]

Cheers vinnyvx. I had not checked the out Reed site before - it looks the best for our field.

[Triple SA]

Vinny,

Do these civvy job sites work in Vegas?
:PDT_Xtremez_15:

[vinnyvx]

Vinny,

Do these civvy job sites work in Vegas?
:PDT_Xtremez_15:

I thought you were going to flip burgers at Creech AFB and generally be a man of leisure!? Didn't you say something about having a wife and not working yourself?

If that doesn't float your boat anymore check out these 51 HR jobs in Vegas!

http://jobsearch.monster.com/Search.aspx?q=&fn=5&lid=541&re=130&cy=us&brd=1&JSNONREG=1