AAC Flying Pay change [Archive]

timex

12th Mar 2007, 14:09

Well recently in parlimentary written questions, the subject of current manning within the AAC was brougyht up and the figures were as follows:

First figure is planned strength and second figure actual strength.

1 Regt AAC: 60 (54)
3 Regt AAC: 85 (57)
4 Regt AAC: 85 (63)
5 Regt AAC: 93 (64)
9 Regt AAC: 85 (69)

This doesn't take into account people on conversion courses, although it doesn't take the brains of the holy one to work out that is at max 20..

So on those figures (as at Feb 07) I make that 101 aircrew not accounted for..
and even with the withdrawal of Gazelle, which I believe has been extended again...

But I guess what is more bitter to swallow is that the RAF/RN FRI was based upon the lure of civvi flying. So let me get this straight...Army and RM pilots aren't able to find employment outside the services?? Me thinks not.

Add to this the latest slap in the face of recalculating rates of pay, so that there is no seniority in length of flying service...well all I can say is someone has taken a hoofing big gun and aimed it well and truly at their feet!!

This was taken from the Pay Rise thread.......

wg13_dummy

12th Mar 2007, 16:45

Simple. Vote with your feet.

The civvy market is pretty much crying out for experience.

As usual, the Corps is planning for the present.

Flying pay is a retention incentive and to move the goal posts must mean that there is no need to retain pilots. Thats all well and good today but in two, four or six years? Are they going to re adjust it again?

I also hear there are moves afoot to increase the time bar on completion of the pilots course to six years and also do away with first tour flying pay.

Money isn't the driving force to go flying but it would be nice to know that we are at least on the same terms with the RAF and RN. Especially as we do the same flying course!

Nice way to go on trying to attract people to stay around Army Avn. Last one out, turn the lights off.

Overmanned?? Where?? Not on this planet.

mutleyfour

12th Mar 2007, 16:47

Yes, and somewhere amongst that lot they need to find a handful of potential Fixed wing pilots.

wg13_dummy

12th Mar 2007, 17:05

So, more commitment with less renumeration and a ****ty contract to boot?

Yep, that sounds like a great way to retain and nurture aircrew.

Some will see this as a method of making people go AH now. How much was the FRI bandied around for them? :hmm:

peoplespoet

12th Mar 2007, 20:56

It's been a while since I cast an eye over PPRUNE threads, but what a surprise (not) to see that DAAvn has done it again. How can one department make so many out of touch and uncalculated (stupid) decisions and still be taken seriously.

What part of what the **ck are you doing to the AAC and its moral dont you understand?

HQ DAAvn is supposed to support and protect the AAC and ensure that it remains in line with defence policy and capability. Joint rules and treatment would at least be a start, now it would appear that the AAC goes from crisis to crisis, without management or direction.

Oh well, at least the summers on its way, nearly time for the big push!

PP :ok:

RotatingPart

12th Mar 2007, 23:08

Typical,

we spend the first 50 years of our existance justifying ourselves to the rest of the Army, Navy and Air Force and when we become a credible force in our own right, showing exactly what we're capable of, and of our future potential, we accept second best again.

I am proud to serve in the Army Air Corps. I am True Blue. How many of those "flying a desk" at DAAvn, on top and enhanced rates of flying pay can say the same. I don't fly Army because it pays well. But by the same token, I don't work for free. A fair and equal rate (for EVERYONE) doesn't sound unreasonable does it?

mutleyfour

13th Mar 2007, 08:43

On close inspection of the list you might find a number of people whom have left long ago and even one whom was sadly KIA almost a year ago.

What a smack in the face that is, I am appallled!

Investor in People

13th Mar 2007, 18:22

I have always stood on the sidelines of PPrune and never posted my opinions for various reasons HOWEVER this issue is one that I just cannot stand by and watch. It is totally out of order.

I'm surprised that this forum is not inundated from outraged personnel, but then I realise that the chain of command can be very, very long especially for bad news.

As far as I am concerned, this directive is:

1. Totally out of step with the other 2 services.
2. An absurd interpretation of the rules.
3. Inspires no loyalty, and if anything will drive our pilots to the rickety gate to civvy street where there are jobs aplenty at the moment. It's suicidal.

I implore those in the "ivory tower" or " mouldy prefab" to reassess this policy document, examine and question this latest interpretation of the rules, and think sensibly of how it's delivery is perceived by those on the receiving end. Having an officer named on the hitlist who was killed nearly a year ago is totally out of order from a "just" G1 organisation.

This is the same organisation that has ADG's on operations who are not being paid for being ADG's.

It's embarrassing - please get a grip.

IIP

JHC Wilton

13th Mar 2007, 19:35

Hmmm.
Sounds like you chaps would benefit from having a Joint HQ!
These single service issues need to be addressed and brought into line with best practice - which in this case, does not appear to be as demonstrated by the Army!
By the way, I see lots of former Army balmy types are starting their Chinook conversion - plenty more places up for grabs I believe.

Pip, pip!

RotatingPart

13th Mar 2007, 20:27

JHC Wil',

Where do I sign up? :ok:

wg13_dummy

13th Mar 2007, 21:44

Behind me. :E

Jeep

15th Mar 2007, 07:25

How times have changed. I remember when SNCO/Officer flying pay was all brought into line in the 80s. At one point someone had to make a decision on whether crewman time counted towards your wings starting date for pilot pay. It did. Whoever made that interpretation of the rules certainly did me a favour as well as many others. It is a shame the same positive interpretation of the rules was not used this time. On completion of Aircrewmans course, awarded observer wing, flying pay started. Each 4 years after that a rise in flying pay. What could be more simple. The airforce and navy are still the same. Only the army insists on completing other courses to start flying pay.

Flying pay should start when you are awarded your wings. It is not only retention pay, it is additional pay for an additional skill set and a recognition of the extra element of danger that flying has.

Army Flying pay is not started until you complete a conversion after wings. Barking.The quickest way to get flying in the AAC now is to fail your lynx or AH conversion and get put onto a Gaz conversion.

I am lucky, i no longer get flying pay as I am on PES. If this decision had cost me a single pound ... oh how i would have congratulated the system on another fine piece of man management.

This change in flying pay has saved money. At what cost? Some aircrew on the list will have to wait an extra 4 years to get to the next rate. Do the AAC have such a glut of aircrew that they can afford to be so blatant about this 'anti retention' measure. No retention bonuses, just the opposite.

No one wins after this change. MOD save a bit of money but the long term result will be more good guys leaving. Net loss for the MOD. Simple to change. Flying pay starts after wings and increases every 4 years after that.

Low Ball

15th Mar 2007, 08:04

Jeep,
Always nice tangling with you on this media. I must take issue with you however in your last post. Flying pay did not start on award of wings, it started on taking up a flying appointment which attracted flying pay, in the Field Army, post award of wings.
So Low Ball got his wings on the 15th Jan 1970 (were you at School by then?) and all his course mates disappeared off to UK, BAOR, Middle East and Far East to fly the powerful Sioux. Ah the days of postings anywhere in the world with not a care in the world no house no labrador no worries! LB was to be a Scout Pilot (Queeen of the sky). Anyway after the Scout Course I took up an appointment in BAOR and my flying pay started from the date on the posting order. All my contemporaries had had the benefit of flying pay for some 6 months.
Never got over it
Low Ball

timex

15th Mar 2007, 08:35

Jeep / LB, different again as my Flying pay started (as a crewman, Royal Marine) the day I walked through the gates at MW to start the course. Every 3 yrs after that another increase, consequently myself and many others starting Pilots courses later on were already on 2nd tour, your increases continued so that by the time I did the Aircraft Commanders course I went straight onto 2rd tour A/C pay.

Another huge bungle that can only send more people off to civvy street.

Clockwork Mouse

15th Mar 2007, 08:41

Low Ball

We must have been at MW at the same time. Got my wings Oct 69 (Course 208 - the last Hiller course) and went on to fly my namesake. I seem to remember getting student flying pay during the course but can't find any documentation to support the memory.

Elmlea

15th Mar 2007, 10:39

Army Flying pay is not started until you complete a conversion after wings. Barking.The quickest way to get flying in the AAC now is to fail your lynx or AH conversion and get put onto a Gaz conversion.

I can't speak for the Navy, but this is true in the RAF as well. There are a lot of people on this thread and the other one on AAC pay/FRI/FP complaining that the RAF get flying pay either at wings, or after X weeks of flying training; no longer the case!

Current RAF trainee pilots get initial rate FP on completion of a recognised OCU, or on recategorisation to B1 if they're first-tourist instructors. So you're not the only ones who get it on conversion! Bearing in mine the lengths of holds that you can still find if you're unlucky, you're looking at 6 months for EFT, 10 months for BFJT, 6-8 months AFT, 4-6 months TW, 6 months OCU...

Python21

15th Mar 2007, 10:42

Clockwork Mouse
I was on 210 APC, which really was the last Hiller course, flying 52 hours on Hiller and 8 hours on the Bell G4A in Basic Rotary.
Alan

Low Ball

15th Mar 2007, 10:53

Well history and reunions in the making. CM and Python 21 you are both right (call it an age problem) There was a student rate of flying pay not much IIRC around the £1 mark. So I remained on student rates until I appeared at Bunde as a trained Scout pilot.

BTW Python we were on the same course of the two of us that wore tarton on 210 I was the young handsome one

LB

Clockwork Mouse

15th Mar 2007, 11:02

P21 and LB
If you two were Jocks, I think I may have a vague memory (every memory is vague these days) of one of you. Wish I could work out how to post a photograph on this blasted thing, but then I was only a Sioux pilot!

Low Ball

15th Mar 2007, 11:14

P21 and CM

P21 was not a Jock I now know who he is and he was a Royal. There were still 2 Jocks on 210, both amazingly called Mike, I was the Lt the other was a Capt.

Still no clues as to your ID CM?

LB

Clockwork Mouse

15th Mar 2007, 11:25

LB
Still no clues as to your ID CM?
I'll try to remember who I am. Think I was an Anglian. Captain at the time. Was Richard Orde, a Jock, on 210? Inshaw? Clarke?
Come to think of it, Orde was earlier, 207 I think.

RotatingPart

15th Mar 2007, 15:24

LB,

was that not back in the days when £1 went a long way? :}

Jeep

15th Mar 2007, 16:25

Lowball - you go back further than me, thank you for the correction.

Elmlea - just shows you cant believe everything you hear. Thanks for putting me straight.

Jeep

LOSTinSPICE

16th Mar 2007, 10:58

Had a visit from DAAVN top brass yesterday to the Regiment. We got a chance to view our concerns on various things including this pay change.

The short of it is from above this pay change is here to stay and pilots will have to 'mark time' (civvie speak -pay cut) on their pay. He also said that the Lynx fleet is undermanned (at last the penny drops but no retention bonus). He did say that P2 pay may also go.

I told him that I have a copy of the old rules from DAAVN stating effectively the opposite of what he was saying but it was brushed over.

I'm not 'marking time' for anybody. If the AAC wants to pay me only 2 flying tours, then thats all they will get! RAF here I come!

Cheers.

LOSTinSPICE

16th Mar 2007, 11:41

Me again. I was tasked to fly CGS from A to B. Guess what my top subject was? Yep, P1 pay. CGS is a pilot himself and was on side about our pay claims. He said he would speak to DAAVN about it very soon.

Being a crusty pilot NCO has some privilages after all!

Ta Ta for now.

Eight Eights Blue

16th Mar 2007, 13:11

I have been itching to get my bit in but only just remebered password and as a person that now has to mark time for another 4 1/2 years to go onto enhanced I feel a few words need to be said.

Correct me if I am wrong but a flying tour is a flying tour and it is deemed to be 4 years as it is across the services. Therefore:

0-4 years lower rate
4-8 years middle rate
8-12 years higher rate
12+ enhanced

I was a Cpl pilot and had the long wait for Ac Comd and got it after 4 1/2 years but was already on middle rate as being a pilot and completed 9 yrs reckonable got it after 3 years as the rules clearly defined. i then went onto Ac Comd middle rate and subsequently higher rate at the 8 yr point.

During this time there was confusion for everyone in this bracket and clearly remebered and still have possession of a letter from DAAvn stating that to avoid confusion flying tours were 4, 8, 12 respectively and we all agreed.

To state the rules now and having read the recent letter from DAAvn there is a complete shift and if you read the rules then all these years since 1964 (the pay warrant) there was no justification for getting Ac Comd as you would have reverted to P1 initial. Clearly a load of B----x as usual. Surely the tours of 4, 8 and 12 are stead fast and the incentive to command and qualify was rewarded with the extra pay for the extra responsibility. Call me old fashioned but this is the norm in civ div for any pilot receiving command. More responsibility-more pay.

It is also worth noting on the AFPRB 07 that it clearly states that to go onto enhanced you must have been in receipt of higher rate for the previous 4 years. Who is right the AFPRB or the clown who introduced this JPA fiasco.

Also with regards to P1 and P2 - years ago and more so today I used to log P1 in the relevant column but still got P2 pay so surely somewhere along the line i must be due back pay for all my P1 time. Clearly not cause you would not be able to work it out but its worth a legal wrangle if nothing else.

Many more comments to come now I have my password but must dash for now but has anyone got the number of that legal beagle that was used in the FRI scandal a couple of years ago. Bet he could do with a few more clients to cater for.

Two's in

16th Mar 2007, 22:39

Had a visit from DAAVN top brass yesterday to the Regiment....surely it's more of a dull bronze these days.

LOSTinSPICE

17th Mar 2007, 12:58

I'm surprised at the limited mumber of replies concerning this pay **** up. Come on guys please take 2 minutes of your time and log in, lets here your views!

Cheers.

Ernesto Guevara

17th Mar 2007, 15:15

Hello,

Sorry for not speaking out before now, but I have been busy trying to find out if this was really going to happen or not.
Unfortunately it is.
We have been told that we are lucky and should be happy because we do not have to pay back all the money that has (allegedly) been incorrectly paid.:ugh:
A pilot coming off the course now will be paid £44000 less over a twelve year tour.
This change of interpretation along with removal of FRI is appalling and will not do the Corps any favours.
I think there has not been many posts for a few reasons:

1. not everyone knows about it yet.
2. some people just dont believe it will happen (it is, so suck it up)
3. Those who have just gone up a rate and are going to get paid £30000+ more than a mate (who did their check ride a week later), might be a little embarassed and a bit worried in case he loses his own higher rate.
4. People are in shock.
5. They are too busy looking on LASORS, CAA or in the RAF careers office.

This decision saddens me as I have always been proud of my Army pilot status but now dont care what colour my uniform is as long as I am treated well.
I dont know if complaining will change anything.
The only thing that will change is Senior Army pilots will be looking elsewhere.

Adios Amigos

pratattheback

17th Mar 2007, 16:44

My paperwork has just gone in.

Horror box

17th Mar 2007, 17:40

I have bitten my lip many times over the last few years, and resisited commenting on many issues of such a contentious nature. This however, I find utterly, utterly appalling, and am so incensed by this absolute, complete and utter lack of loyalty being exercised downwards from those running this Corps, especially at a time when we need to be pulling together and looking after our people.
Over the last few years, I have gradually seen the pride and espirit de corps, of a fine organisation, being chipped away, and compromised. Our corps, made up of some of the finest men and women in the nation, who are working their socks off, being shot at, mortared, rocketed, spending large amounts of time away from families, saving lives, every single day and still dont question.
None of us are in it for the financial rewards, but what really stings the most, is that the reward for the hard work, frustration, stress, and danger is a whopping great big pay decrease.
In a Corps of so many good people, working so bloody hard, it is astounding that such a few people can do such damage to the overall morale and effectiveness of such an organisation. The morale in general of the Corps right now must be at the absolute lowest, and whilst so many of us are on operations risking our lives.
I am quite amazed that this has not made it into the national news, as it is a scandal of the highest order.
What will this do for overall manning? Not a lot, as all that will happen is that we will lose more of the experienced pilots, that we should be so desperately holding on to, and filling it with inexperience. Book keepers will be happy, but be under no illusion the overall effectiveness is reducing. When times are really tough, it is our pride, and professionalism that keep us going. I am sure the professionalism will not change, but it is hard to feel loyalty to an organisation that keeps letting its people down so badly and is clearly so out of touch with its greatest asset.
A sad sad time indeed.:(

Floater AAC

17th Mar 2007, 21:04

Just wondering about the legality of all this. In the long and short of it, several years ago we were told to stop recording P2 time, only P1 hours. Therefore how can there still be a pay band for P2 if nobody logs it? Plus does this make all contracts i.e timebars void because of a change of pay scheme?
Any legal eagles out there?:confused:

Elmlea

18th Mar 2007, 08:18

Sorry to stick my head in, but can someone explain to a non-AAC person exactly what the change was? What system were you on before, and what are you on now?

It sounds like you were getting flying pay from the award of wings, is that right?

HEDP

18th Mar 2007, 12:12

Prior to this letter coming out there were 4 levels of flying pay as a pilot and four levels as an aircraft commander; initial, middle, higher and enhanced (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th tour).
When you reached 2nd tour pilots pay and then achieved aircraft command you moved onto 2nd tour commanders pay and then carried on up the ladder.
With effect of this letter regardless of how many tours you conduct as a pilot, when achieving aircraft command you will revert to 1st tour aircraft commanders pay.
Although this may not be a drop in pay, it is significantly lower than a lot of people will have based their financial futures on.
It is not retrospective in monetary terms as no-one will take a drop in pay but, you will mark time on your current level until the retrospective interpretation of your entitlement dates catches up.
People have done their own individual assesments and the reduction in earnings over the period of this adjustment vary from a couple of thousand pounds to several tens of thousands as people mark time for up to seven years before moving to the next level.
Disgusting, and disgraceful spring to mind and when it is combined with the Corps seeming to desperatly be searching for Lynx pilots to justify the surplus declared to the pay review body that ought to have been declared as a defecit, thereby ensuring no FRI for an overworked, overstretched organisation then it all adds to a very disatisfied bunch of people at the moment.
Add this to Vehicle Mechanics getting an FRI but not the overworked Apache technicians who are leaving in their droves, personnel being swapped between Dishforth and Wattisham and it strikes me that Army Aviation was not well represented to the AFPRB this year and things do not look good for the future.
HEDP

LFFC

18th Mar 2007, 14:43

It looks like the reasons why Trenchard set up the RAF nearly 90 years ago are as valid now as they were then! :p

Good luck all of you crews in the AAC - I honestly think you deserve better!

Eight Eights Blue

18th Mar 2007, 15:36

Back again from a weekend of working out how to find the other £200 a month i was expecting from next month. Complete nuts and how how many people like me based there mortgages on the fact that flying pay increments should have been in concrete as all the paperwork states. I tend to lose 14000 over the next 4 and a half years and am not a happy bunny.

I do believe that there has to be some parliamentary answers to all this cluster and i for one am in the process of asking questions in bigger places on the legalities of it all and the fact that effectively I along with others could be forced to sell up now as am a little overstretched now that I am not getting my enhanced when I expected it.

Also a message for the peepers from HQ who regularly police this site. How about backing us up and offering us some kind of honest explanation as to the position you have put 90% of the Corps in. No your probably not bothered, too busy spending your enhanced flying pay and wondering how your gonna replace the pilots who sign off because of this. Simple answer is to sort this fiasco out once and for all and save millions on not having to train new pilots to replace the ones that have now so rightly been tipped over the edge.

I seem to recall a few years ago a few pilots being grounded for stress due to financial c--k ups within the corps and they retained their flying pay on medical grounds and did not have to do the job. Also I believe that now with JPA if you are grounded for medical reasons beyond your control then you keep your pay status for 7 years instead of the 2 years on this system.

While on the rant, anyone no about pay for instructors as surely this must be on the horizon. Looking at AFPRB the only spec trade add pay not to have instructor rates is, yes you have guessed it.

PILOTS

Divers - add pay
Dive instructors - instructors pay
paratroopers - para pay
paratrooper jump instructor - PJI pay

and the list goes on. Obviously not that well represented on the AFPRB this year after all.

Letsby Avenue

18th Mar 2007, 17:39

Sorry to hear about the flying pay chaps. I received flying pay the day I walked through the gates at MW in 82 to start my crewman's' course, 8 years' later, as Jeep mentioned, someone decided that all my time counted and I went from a middling NCO pilot rate to the new top rate of flying pay, what with that, and a recent promotion, my pay increased by 30% overnight - Changed days I guess but there are market forces at play here - the Corps has a ready pool of would-be, wannabe pilots and has endless resources at is disposal to train them, it simply doesn't need to pay a fortune for pilot retention. The civilian market however is paying very well for experienced pilots simply because the crusty ones are now sozzled in Spain.

For all of you out there who are just coming up to their 12 years' pension then get out and transfer the pension to your new employers scheme, if you are really lucky you should get a great deal when joining a Local Government Scheme (LGPS) (Gold Plated) Enabling you to retire at full whack at 55. For those of you that are to close to 22yrs then bite the bullet and go for the pension but not one jot more - you are worth more outside.

For anyone who doesn't fit inside the two scenarios given then consider Australia, NZ or the RAF (probably in that order)

DO NOT DELAY make your decision NOW! and don't work for peanuts.

Greenielynxpilot

18th Mar 2007, 18:55

I don't see what all the trouble is ... I'm pretty sure that one of the earliest special flying qualifications in my logbook is "qualified P1 day/night Squirrel", achieved whilst at 660 Sqn some 12 months before I got my wings.
I also have "qualified P1 day/night Lynx" dated well before I ever passed my aircraft commander's check.
The way I see it, I am actually owed back pay :)
I'm sure they will move the goalposts again as soon as I mention this to them, though. I have always considered HQ DAAVn to be the graveyard for the Corps' sorry retinue of washed-out has-beens who are just marking time until their regular commissions expire and/or their children finish boarding school. This utter scandal just confirms my low opinion of them. I think it is time we gave them some work to do. A formal complaint under the data protection act that my privacy was violated (by publishing personal details in a widely circulated letter), a protracted letter-writing campaign to MPs and the press, requests under the freedom of information act for the actual data that allegedly supports this change of policy, followed by a formal redress and subsequent claim in an employment tribunal for contructive dismissal should do the trick. Even if I never manage to claw back the 14 grand this is going to cost me, it will be a cathartic and healing process.
PS - Anyone noticed the conspicuous lack of any thread on this subject on the arssey website? Does the conspiracy run deeper than simple AAC G1 ineptitude, I wonder?

AHQHI656SQN

18th Mar 2007, 22:41

I haven't yet seen this letter, but does it mean that any flying tours completed as a pilot (RAF crewman rates) don't count at all?
I was a second tour pilot once, and when I qualified as aircraft commander I reverted to first tour commanders pay, only for a few weeks, but I actually took a pay cut for being better qualified. However after 4 years from first payment of flying pay I went onto second tour commanders pay. Has this now changed?:confused:

Muzza9999

18th Mar 2007, 23:26

This is the straw that has broken this camels back. Off to another service where I dont get illegit paycuts. 8 years AAC down the pan, nylon here I come!!!

aytoo

19th Mar 2007, 07:23

"...plus ca change, plus ca le meme chose...".

I was one of those dropped upon from a great height over the original FRI - you know, the one that was about retaining experience in the middle order of aviation across all three services? Then one that forced several of us out, grounded several others, and still leaves a bitter taste?

I left. Broke my old true-blue heart to be honest, but there is only so much that one can be expected to take. I met so many AAC at the next Army v Navy at Twickenham just after leaving -and had my hand shaken by some very senior types who admired my stand.

The stand was not difficult, as I had already passed 22, so the pension was safe. However...

The only way to make your voice heard is to vote with the feet. Having gone down the redress path - on FRI and another emotive subject - I can tell you that the road is long, fraught, and potentially expensive. If anyone really wants some advice on a s.180 redress, I will be glad to oblige. Just pm me with your e-mail or phone number. I took one of mine virtually to the steps of the High Court for a Judicial Review and (surprise, surprise) they settled out of court. Out of that experience, I am now studying law so that, at some point in the future, I can represent folks in exactly your type of situation.

Parting shot. Do not put up with this guys and girls. I know that you are worth much, much more than this treatment.

Muzza9999

19th Mar 2007, 19:28

The other services are recruiting at present, with no drop in pay. Also whilst we are on it I might mention the fact that RM pilots graduate from the same course as us and get full flying pay - the fact they degraded Army flying pay until AC checkride was out of order in the first place when compared to our crab and Navy bretheren.

my papers are in, you may consider doing the same, you can buy a lot of white socks for 20k!:mad:

ChristopherRobin

19th Mar 2007, 19:54

They've just shaved £5500 of my future earnings.

But never mind that, just look at how unfair this is to younger pilots. Anyone who, back in the day, trained on gazelle and stayed on gazelle, was bound to get to aircraft commander status long before those who converted straight onto lynx. Many are still on middle/top rate and this will affect them (as it does me).

But if you're an ab initio apache pilot, you will spend a year on CTT and CTR after your pilot course - at this point I'm not sure when they are awarded AC Comd - but even if it is immediately on completion of CTR that means they will be several months behind their brethren that went onto Lynx and therefore penalised as a result - for the rest of their careers! I do hope that those journalists who rightly lionised the apache pilots in afghanistan recently also pick up on their new pay scheme!

So here we have an Air Corps that not only doesn't pay an FRI to its pilots like the RN and RAF do, it doesn't increment their wages in the same way and in the way that they have been to date!

Now the obvious fact won't have escaped any of you that the overwhelming majority - and probably every man-jack - of officers in the AAC who put this iniquitous rule in place are already on enhanced flying pay, so it won't make a penny's difference to them! A bit like MPs taxing the @rse of us and changing our pension schemes while giving themselves the most generous pay rise and retirement package since Bill Gates thought "maybe I should try working in computers".

I for one shall be inspecting future awards of OBEs and MBEs to see if it correllates with the department responsible for and the signatory to "The Letter" - a letter which will live in infamy - to borrow a phrase from FDR. I have no doubt the medals ought to be cast from an appropriate number of silver pieces.

In a day and age when the Colonel Commandant of the Army Air Corps, Gen Sir Richard Dannatt - an honourable man with whom I have had the privilege to serve - reminds us all of the Covenant between a nation and its armed forces (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=410175&in_page_id=1770), it is shaming, frankly, to see this covenant so cynically and cravenly discarded by the very officers sworn to uphold it.

They are beneath contempt.

mutleyfour

19th Mar 2007, 20:04

It seems that were all looking at this the wrong way. Apparently its the old glass half full over half empty argument. It seems our Lords did fight our case and have prevented us reverting to the "correct" level and paying back any monies overpayed.

So I for one am off to top up my glass and toast the good old AAC! :ugh:

helidriver

19th Mar 2007, 20:58

I, like many other unsuspecting others, loose nearly 10K and my new rate occurs 1 year after my run out date. There is only 1 dept in DAAvn responsible for this. Don't be under the illusion they fought hard, believe me I know they didn't. I would not complain however, if the money 'saved' was used to finance the Door Gunners and Winch Operators who are clearly also being punished by the same dept and still don't receive continious flying pay, and in some locations not at all. Consider this, is the decision not to pay them is because of the implementation of JPA (that was the excuse stated at least 6 months ago) or just another scam to save money?

So, no FRI, freeze in flying rate despite previous stated policy and rearcrew pay disparity. Not bad for a Corps about to celebrate its 50th Anniversary. Perhaps the savings are paying for the bash at MW in September?

Frankly, I'm disgusted and appalled so much bad policy in such a short space of time can negatively influence the retention of so many good quality Officers and NCO's. I don't know about rocking the boat, it appears it's leaning precariously with a trickle running down the inside. Maybe it's about time to abandon ship?

EmeraldToilet

19th Mar 2007, 21:01

I find it a little hard to believe that with all the other pay anomalies that have been written off lately anyone had to ‘fight’ to allow us to keep money that had already been paid. I say this bearing in mind the number of tiffies/yeomen/foremen/clerk of works etc.. who have been being incorrectly paid since pay drop 2000 and Glasgow simply asked the treasury to have the money written off.

Sounds to me like someone embellishing the facts to divert the attention, not like the corps at all….or B.

Ginseng

19th Mar 2007, 21:26

I have no knowledge of the letter to which you refer, but I can tell you what JSP 754 (Pay and Charges) has to say about Specialist Pay (Flying).

I am afraid this is one area where, despite being a tri-Service document, it allows differences between the 3 Services, however:

Pilots not qualified as Aircraft Commanders (P2):

RM/Army (Officers and ORs) Pilots P2 - SP(F) at Initial Rate "On completion of CTT"; Middle Rate "After 9 years' total service, subject to a minimum of 3 years' aircrew service; Top Rate "after 18 years reckonable service".

Officers: Maj and below, Upon qualification as Aircraft commander (P1): P1 SP(F), Initial rate "On qualification" (as P1); Middle Rate "After 4 years on the preceding rate"; Top Rate "After 4 years on the preceding rate"; Enhanced Rate "(on having) Received the top rate of SP(F) for 4 years.

Other Ranks: Army NCO pilots qualified as Aircraft Commander (P1): P1 SP(F), Initial Rate "On qualification as aircraft commander"; Middle Rate - "After 4 years on the preceding scale"; Top Rate - "After 4 years on the preceding scale"; Enhanced Rate - "Afetr 4 years on the preceding scale".

RM/Army - Transition to P1 Pilot Status

On attainment of aircraft commander status, RM and Army P2 Pilots will transition to the P1 scale as follows:

Pilots on P2 Initial Rate will transition to the P1 Initial Rate with zero seniority in this new rate, i.e. they will then have to serve 4 years on the P1 initial rate before elevation to the P1 Middle Rate.

Pilots on the P2 Middle Rate with less than 4 full years seniority on the P2 Middle Rate will remain on the P2 Middle Rate until they complete 4 full years on that rate, before transitioning to the P1 Middle Rate (with zero seniority at this new rate).

Pilots on the P2 Middle Rate with 4 full years or more seniority on the P2 Middle Rate will transition immediately to the P1 Middle Rate (with zero seniority in this new rate).

Pilots on the P2 Top Rate will transition immediately to the P1 Middle Rate (with zero seniority in this new rate).

From what you have been saying above, you appear to have been told something different. Or have I misunderstood? I cannot guarantee, of course, that a change to JSP 754 is not in the offing.

Regards

Ginseng

Sloppy Link

19th Mar 2007, 21:27

The reason they went for "mark time" rates of pay was that they originally wanted to claw back all the overpaid monies. When it was pointed out that they therefore would have to also claw back money from those that had left the service it was realised what an impossible task it would be. It is this that our lords and masters quote as fighting our corner. Parity across all three services would be nice, why don't we get a Joint organisation to fight our corner for us, some one like....JHC perhaps?

Ron Fenest

19th Mar 2007, 21:37

This particular problem would affect me if I was to stay in any longer than I am. Luckily I have gone past the magic "22" and just marking time until the right job opportunity comes along (or I get off my backside and look for it).

This is probably the right thread to highlight another pay anomaly that AAC aircrew have to put up with while the other services laugh at us.

I am happy to be corrected if I have misunderstood the following:

PES(A)
Army NCO aircrew can not progress beyond level 22 on the PES(A) payscales.
RAF WO Loadies can progress to level 29. (this is a BIG difference in pay and pension)

This is not a dig at Loadies. In fact, it's a big up to the people looking after the loadies by making sure they can move further up the scale.

Just so I get this clear. A WO1 with 3-4000 flying hours, on extended service, currently flying AH/LUH on ops, having passed the same course as his RAF/RN/RM brethren can not get paid as much as a rearcrewman having done exactly as much service, albeit the AAC chap did it from the lowlier position of the "front seat".

Have I got this wrong ? If not, then why is this the case ?

While it's not the same issue I feel that it is the "little" things in life like this that matter, especially as the AAC appear more and more to be the military aviation worlds whipping boys.

Someone mentioned forming something called JHC? what a great idea. With something like CHC being an alternative.

helidriver

19th Mar 2007, 21:45

If this issue is about interpretation of the rules how come they have wrongly interpreted flying pay since Crew Restructuring (CREST) in about 1986, when the 2 pilot crew concept system was initiated. So, has it taken 21 years to discover this anomaly or have the rules changed subtly over time without informing those affected?

The only fair option is to start this 'new' policy for pilots who have yet to begin pilot selection and therefore know the policy before commitment.

MINself

19th Mar 2007, 22:20

Always the less well looked after and now the lesser paid too! and with the increased frequency of Op tours... Wow, DAAvn must know with absolute certainty that his mass of SNCO aircrew won't leave before their 22 years inspite of how badly their terms and conditions get rearranged to suit this latest cash saving farce :=

aytoo

19th Mar 2007, 22:51

My shredder has just eaten my application form to participate in the wonderful forthcoming 50th anniversary celebrations.

When, as an Airtpr, I participated in the 25th Anniversary back in '82, I would not have believed that things could ever come to such a pass as they have now. Frankly I am disgusted that my former Flt Comd, now DAAvn, could have allowed this to occur.

Naaaaaargh, scratch that -anyone who can ban ketchup and sliced bread from his mess could easily permit such 'minor' inconveniences as the present pay debacle to take place. (Cluck cluck, gibber gibber, my old man's a mushroom etc).

But as already noted, the persons responsible are already well feathered for their retirement funds, just like Bliar & Co plc, so the rest of you can just - well, transfer to the crabs actually. Or the airlines. Or anywhere else that you might just start to feel valued for your contribution. But certainly not in the Army Aeroplane Club.

What a tragic waste of a fine Corps!:sad:

Spurlash2

19th Mar 2007, 22:55

Ron
WO RAF Aircrew on the PAS get as far as Level 20 out of 35. Is PES (A) the same thing?
S2

Ron Fenest

19th Mar 2007, 23:06

Spurlash, Yes it is the same thing and I stand corrected.

Cheers.

P.S I got confused (easily done) by the term Rearcrew, and even more confused because it was level 28 (not 29).

I'll get my coat.

Eight Eights Blue

19th Mar 2007, 23:36

It would appear that the message is hitting the HQ with considerable pace as people have told me that other letters are now hitting the offices, 1 alledgedly mentioning the that it was not very tactful how the news was delivered to the corps, no s--t sherlock, bit late now lofty - damage done!!

If someone out there represented us so well at the AFPRB then clearly it was some other clown who has sold us down the river cause I am naturally assuming that whoever represented us through all this fiasco naturally fought to keep the present structure (as we all know it) in place and have the JSP754 or pay warrant amended to reflect what has been happening over the last 13 years that i have been involved with the AAC and god knows how many more years before that.

Questions.

1. Who represented the Corps at the AFPRB?
2. Who represented us in the implementation against JPA?
3. Who made the f--k up in the first place?
4. Has any tackled the legal side of this yet?
5. Are we all gonna stick together on this one and see it through to the end?

PNVS

20th Mar 2007, 00:22

What I don’t understand is the poor set up of Army pilot pay? Notwithstanding the P2 to P1 debacle. When a Warrant Officer Class 1 on LSL (A) transfers onto PES (A) and if he was on the top rate of WO1 (likely because the point of transfer from normal rates of pay to PES (A) is IPP plus 5) it works out he will be on level 22. A Sergeant will reach level 22 after 8 Years or so on PES (A)

So if I am right (possibly) :confused: the WO1 will mark time on this rate of pay for 10 years! Can that be fair? Someone in PS10 should lose the problem of a NCO accruing a Lt Colonel pension and allow the normal expectation of an annual increase in pay for every year and a pension representative of a full career as a pilot. :ugh:

Jeep

20th Mar 2007, 07:50

PNVS,

Good point. I think if you work out the equivalent pensions for the levels of PAS against what rank they equate to on normal pension rates, you will see the reason why it is unacceptable to our lords and masters for WO to climb above level 22. The level 35 rate is equal to a red tab colonel. A warrant officer staying in until 55 could easily reach that level. Think that will be allowed or accepted?

I work with WO that are marking time on level 22. Each year I go up a level as I am LE, they do not.

Is that correct?

Professional Aviators should go up a level every year until they max out at level 35 right? ..... and then there is the real world.

Ron Fenest

20th Mar 2007, 08:19

JEEP

A couple of quickies. Are you capped at a particular level as an LE or can you progress to level 35?

Also, I heard that moving on to PES(A) is automatic on commissioning (as long as IPP has been reached), do you know if this is correct?

Have you heard that there is a (draft) plan to change the rules on PES(A) so that NCO aircrew move onto it at IPP instead of IPP+5 ? (this is as likely as Santa bringing my kids a PS3 yesterday).

Personally I think that the final point would be a useful retention tool in light of current pay issues.

neilk

20th Mar 2007, 08:55

If anyone wants to pop their head above the parapet on this PM me and I will get in touch.

Cheers

RotatingPart

20th Mar 2007, 13:37

Count',

the only attractive feature I can see about about PES(A) is the fact that your whole salary is taken into account when it comes to the calculation of your pension. If you're not on the PA spine, it wouldn't matter if you were on super turbo enhanced flying pay, you'd only get a pension for the substansive rank that you're in. That's my uneducated take on it, it's still not parity and not much of a silver lining either. Especially when you consider just how few people in the Army actually make it onto the PA spine.

:\

MINself

20th Mar 2007, 14:19

Thats the clever bit about PES(A) its so subjective its almost unattainable, but still enough of a carrot to keep those too long in the tooth to be bothered to leave jumping to try and get on it.

Ron Fenest

20th Mar 2007, 14:24

Count,

just to add to your figures.

On 07/08 rates a WO1 (level 7) on enhanced flying pay would go straight to level 22 on PES(A) and stay there, potentially for 10 years.

It's actually no difference to what happens before PES(A), I have been marking time on level 7 WO1 pay for 5 years now, the problem is that until (if ever) I get onto PES(A) none of my addpay is pensionable. Spookily enough my period of continuance runs out the day before I qualify for PES.

I can't think of any reason why the AAC accepted IPP+5 as a starting point for NCO PES(A), surely the starting point should be IPP at the very latest, with IPP-5 being a much better retention factor.

To be honest I am one of many people that believes we get paid a fair wage for what we do, especially at my level. What isn't fair is the disparity between services for those people doing the same job.

RotatingPart

20th Mar 2007, 15:08

Ron,

you've hit the nail on the head there I think :ok:. I don't think most people have a complaint about pay in general (of course more would be nice). It's the disparity across the services with regard to flying pay and FRI that seems to me to be the real bone of contention. This has certainly taken the shine off any 50th celebrations for me.

Ron Fenest

20th Mar 2007, 16:57

Count,

As I'm prone to getting my "maffs" wrong I've done a quick double check.

From AFPRB 07

WO1 Level 7 = £118.01 per day (£43077)
Enhanced Rate = £41.12 per day (£15008)

Total £58,085

PES(A) Level 22 = £58,674

Bear in mind that you can't take a pay drop (level 21 = £57,584).

Maybe the pay rise wasn't so bad after all!

Sorry if I appear to be pedantic, I'm not trying to be, just helping to make a point.

countdeblades

20th Mar 2007, 17:12

Ron

Point well and truly taken ta. Best you make it pensionable me old mate...!!

Sloppy Link

20th Mar 2007, 19:02

The 22+5 thing was put in place to prevent the "dis-incentive" of an NCO/WO applying for a LE Commission (you have to be commissioned before your 45th birthday).

Jeep

21st Mar 2007, 07:59

Ron,

LE can climb to level 35. Transfer to PES(A) is not automatic, MCM hand them out after a board. Very few were handed out around the time of pension decision (another big trick missed on the retention boat, as some might have changed their pension and stayed).

There is no real advantage to being on PES(A) unless you can move up the scales past level 22 (LE), or have changed your pension to 05. Very few would have gambled on the pension decision anticipating that they might get PES(A).

2 very positive retention measures would be:

Allow AAC NCO Pilots to climb above level 22
Allow pension swap from 75 to 05 on award of PES(A).

Watch them pigs fly.

Sloppy Link

21st Mar 2007, 20:06

Swap pensions on award of PES(A)! You must be pi$$ed! They would never allow that, the people who manage us are the biggest green eyed monsters I have ever come across and the thought that someone who in their eyes are "temporary polyfilla" hiding the cracks that their mis-management of DE has created could possibly get an equivalent or better pension than them they will fight tooth and nail to stop. What grips me is the individual(s) who are supposed to fight our corner appear to be on their side and not ours for exactly the same reason or because they are sitting pretty. I find it incredible that the other two services find it a fairly straightforward process to become their equivalent of PES(A) but the amount of hoops we have to go through not forgetting the carrot dangling game they play plus the SSC/IRC debacle all add up to my decision to not bother.

Ron Fenest

21st Mar 2007, 21:31

I'm not for one minute doubting anyones experience here but some of this info conflicts with what I am being told and I am on the verge of making career changing/continuing/leaving decisions.

This is what I've been told:

When the offer to transfer pension came around the decision could only be based on what was known at the time, ie: 22 year career. I was informed that in the event of my terms/conditions of service changing ie: commissioning, continuance or LSL(A) then I would have a further opportunity to transfer to 05. This worked the other way as well in that if I could have reasonably expected to serve to 55 and had elected to go onto 05, then subsequently got the old "services no longer required" at 48 then I could switch back to 75.

I got that pearl of wisdom straight from the mouth of the SO1 who signed the OTT letters, not from my RAO or the AAC.

It makes a lot of sense too as how the hell are people supposed to second guess the future, especially in the AAC. Only 2 years ago we were told there were too many pilots and that we needed to lose LOTS over the next 3 years. Guys were actually told to go and find ground jobs and that the chance of continuance/LSL was nil unless you were an AH pilot or an A1 QHI (OK, any QHI). Now we are being told the opposite and things like VEng are being banded about. Obviously the minute anyone takes up VEng they are going to want to switch to 05 as the difference is huge. Logically they must be given that opportunity. If this is not the case then it's a no-brainer, take the pension+lump sum and leave.

I would of thought that moving onto PES(A) was a change in terms/conditions of service, am I being silly?

All of the points raised on this thread need clarifying with the relevant PS depts and a precis/briefing given to all aircrew. People need to make informed decisions about their futures and moving goalposts monthly does not allow for this. These decisions also have to be tri-service to stop the AAC feeling like second class citizens.

Like a lot of people I would happily stay in until 55, I love being in the Army but like those same people I am aware of my earning potential in civvy street and the quality of life on offer, might not be as much fun at work but hey-ho I have got a family to think of. I don't mind 6 months a year on ops for the next 15 years as long as my terms are as fair as the next bloke (the one in Blue).

Ginseng

21st Mar 2007, 22:53

I fear you were led up the garden path. There never was a conditional offer to be able to reconsider transfer to AFPS05 at alater date after Apr 06. The only way you can "transfer" now is to retire from service, and then rejoin later, in which case you would rejoin into AFPS 05. That doesn't mean you would suddenly achieve all the benefits as though you had transfered whilst in continuous service.

There was a condition, which is still active, for RAF personnel selected for redundancy under the current draw down, to leave by Apr 08, that if they had previously transfered to AFPS 05 but could now show that their redundacy terms would have been more advantageous had they remained within AFPS 75, then they could elect to revert to AFPS 75 to exit the Service. I am not aware of any other such arrangement, although it is possible that there are others.

Legally, I don't think PAS/PES(A) membership is a "Term of Service", any more than entitlement to various pay rates and types of allowances could be seen as such. "Terms of Service" are now laid down by Statutory Instruments, and are generally limited to the types of engagements available, the relevant qualifying start and end dates, rights to end service under various circumstances, transfer to the Reserve etc.

Regards

Ginseng

Ron Fenest

21st Mar 2007, 23:46

Many thanks for that and I understand what you are telling me. Making the decision on OTT in the RAF should have been a relatively easy one to make as most people would have known whether they were likely to serve until 55 or indeed if they would want to, I imagine that there was a massive uptake of the offer.

The AAC on the other hand made it perfectly clear, including MCM unit briefings to all non-AH line pilots that the chance of serving past 22 years was effectively NIL. This has to have been a major factor in making the decision to stay on AFPS 75 (well it was the clincher for me). I could probably quantify this by asking how many people (non AH/QHI) elected to change to AFPS 05. I could be wrong but I reckon I could count them on one hand.

I'm sure that when/if VEng is introduced then those same people will feel a bit cheated by the system. This is in fact changing the whole picture and as such I feel it would be only fair to re-offer the pension transfer option. We will not be the only Corps with this problem and I would be interested to know how others are feeling.

I realise what the "rules" state. But I also realise that rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men. If they can change the terms of service then surely they can rethink other options. Actually the offer of VEng combined with the offer to transfer to AFPS05 would be a useful carrot to have in the bag for retention, it puts people straight back into a pension trap that they wouldn't want to leave early.

I also believe that pigs can fly. Of course the easy solution is to make it clear that extended service of any kind is voluntary and as such I can get right back in my little box.

All of course just my useless opinion.

LOSTinSPICE

22nd Mar 2007, 01:24

Hello fellow PPRUNERS!

I have been very active behind the scenes trying to get our voice heard about this pay **** up. To date, I have written to my MP and David Cameron. Also I was able to speak to CGS at length about it and he was shocked at our treatment by DAAVN. I have 'heard' that the SUN newspaper has wind of this also.
I will try every option (including a good moan) before I make the final move and jump ship. Perhaps a joint petition? Or everybody being grounded due to stress? It sounds really desperate (almost mutanous) to say this stuff but what loyalty have DAAVN shown us? Being told to mark time by the Regimental Colonel isn't good enough in 2007, or pretending that they are protecting some from repayments!!!! Bull ***

Ginseng

22nd Mar 2007, 07:53

Don't get me wrong, I do not disagree with the sentiment of your main argument; it just isn't going to happen.
There probably were differences between the 3 Services in the rate of uptake of AFPS 05, and I don't know what they were, but I can assure you that it was by no means an easy and obvious choice for the majority of RAF personnel. The fact that across the 3 services as a whole, the voluntary transfer rate was limited to about 8% should tell us something about how wonderfully tempting the offer was for the majority of people!
Regards
Ginseng

RotatingPart

22nd Mar 2007, 12:45

Lost, me old skip jack son of a sea dog.

Whilst I'm sure the vast majority of people would agree with everything you say, I feel it may be a little harder to actually get them to act. I for one am more than happy to voice my displeasure, and this whole episode is making me think of my next move VERY carefully.

Getting everyones ears to go pop on the same day would certainly make people take note. However, it would only have the desired effect if you can get enough people on board. On paper that shouldn't be too hard, in practice?....

Come to think of it, I am a little bit sniffly today. Is there something going round? :E

:ok:

Eight Eights Blue

22nd Mar 2007, 12:51

Lost in Space.

A credit to you my pruning friend. At least someone has the gumption about them to do something, albeit probably to no avail but your stance is credit to you and all that support you (definately me) in this diabolical fiasco. I have just come off operations and due to go back on operations middle of the year and for what reason - to keep this country safe and sound against terrorism.
Now the question is can I really sustain my level head in an active operational area while worrrying about my finances and the lack of the extra money for which I was expecting and based my mortgage on, guess thats not the kind of thing you want in the back of your mind when the bullets are flying. What will the hierachy say "Get on with it" just as they always do but your right, in 2007, this day and age, do I really have to just get on with it, my a--e I do.
All we are is a statistical object and they give not 2 ****es about us so bout time to start thinking of numero uno.
Cannot wait to see the outcome of the letters to MP and Cameron and looks like the sun news will be well worth the 35p a day for the next few weeks.
No wonder they wont let us join a union which I am sure is a violation of my human rights cause they know fine well that they would not get away with any of the s--t that comes our way.

Sloppy Link

22nd Mar 2007, 20:42

Re the swapping of AFPS75 to 05 or vice versa, the OTT was purely based on a "snapshot" of your circumstances at the time, decisions were irreversible aside from as stated earlier those made redundant within a certain time frame or if you inconveniently died, your spouse could elect to change. The only exception I know of was if your terms of service were incorrect at the decision making time or you had every reason to believe you were under certain terms of service (for example, a signal from your own desk officer telling you that you are now IRC and have a job until your 50th birthday) but then it subsequently turns out that the AAC are not going to conform with the rest of the Army, the OTT board have been sympathetic. What galled me was not a single acknowledgement from anyone accepting the error and recognising the angst it had put so many of us through. It's all about people.

Pongochap

23rd Mar 2007, 18:17

To give all of this some perspective - consider the following:

The following is calculated over the period at which DAAVN has now set our mid rate flying pay.

So from wings to AC Comd (15 months in this case), and then a further 4 years from there before middle rate:

Under the new system:

Total pay would be £23,629.

Made up of P2 pay of £4,205 and A/C Comd pay (aka flying pay anywhere other than the AAC) of £19,424.

Under the ‘old’ system (where middle rate is 4 years from wings):

Total pay would be £30,002

Made up of P2 pay of £4,205, A/C Comd pay of £10,270 and mid Rate flying pay of £15,527.

Even more morale giving:

Compare an AAC Officer pilot with any RN/RM or RAF pilot getting wings at the same time:

Total flying pay of £33,848

Made up of flying pay of (aka A/C Comd pay in the AAC) of £18,320 and Mid Rate flying pay of £15,527.

The figures get more ridiculous if you then look at how much you lose out on over the 8 years from wings and into top/enhanced rates.

What is so grating about this pathetic measure is that the decision has been made by those who are more than happy on their enhanced rates of flying pay and whose likelihood of getting in an operational helicopter, let alone flying one around Iraq or Afghanistan, is distinctly remote.

Of course these people count their jobs as ‘flying related’. If you can count watching aircraft fly past the window at DAVVN a flying related job.

Call me cynical but with these sort of incentives to work ever harder with less and less it’s increasingly hard not to be….!

Greenielynxpilot

23rd Mar 2007, 19:15

The Directorate needs to be made quite clear that this is not simply about the money ... it is about a failure of leadership by the AAC's command.
.
Even if the Lt Col who signed his name to D/AAvn/31/003 dated 1 Mar 07 bothered to fight the cause on behalf those who will be worst affected (which I very much doubt), there has been a monumental corporate comms failure by HQ DAAvn through their complete lack of desire to have any dialogue with the Corps' aircrew over this issue. This simply exacerbates the perception that we are held in complete contempt by them.
.
Anyone who has earned their wings since Feb 1995 will be affected, and will receive less pay than they will have had a legitimate expectation of earning. The opening line of that letter claims that "the rules for transition to P1 rates of flying pay .... have been interpreted in an inconsistent manner across the Corps for some time".
.
I challenge you to name a single AAC officer, at any time during the last 16 years, who has not progressed up the rates of flying pay on the 4-yr anniversary of their wings parade.
.
There was nothing inconsistent about the interpretation of the rules at all. This is a blatant change in the accepted practice, which effectively reduces the value of the rewards package that an AAC pilot receives over his/her entire career.
.
In my case, the difference will amount £16,185.42. Or, to put it another way, I have received a pay CUT of 8.34% for each and every day between now and when I eventually catch up to the level I believed I would be at. This will happen again in 4 yrs time (although in my case, I can categorically state that I will not remain in the AAC long enough for that to matter - I wonder how many others are feeling the same way?)
.
Others, who will suffer disproportionately more, include all Cpl pilots who were prevented from occupying aircraft commander LSNs until they promoted to Sgt, and pretty much anyone who took longer than the minimum six month period because of the attrocious serviceability (particularly on Lynx) during the late 90's and early 00's.
.
The present Director is quite happy to bask in the reflected glory of the Corps and its aircrew ... and so he must also be prepared to bear the responsibility for the weaknesses of his staff, particularly the G1 branch at HQ DAAvn. All the officers involved must be made quite clear that their failure to fight this, their failure to communicate honestly and openly with those most seriously affected, and their treachery in trading off the Corps' best interests in return for being 'allowed' to remain on enhanced rates of flying pay themselves, is utterly disgusting and reprehensible to pretty much the entirety of those they are supposed to serve. I hope they choke on their 30 pieces of silver. This scandal will tarnish them for the remainder of their careers.
.
In the meantime, may I suggest that everyone registers their disapproval by cancelling their 'two day's pay' contribution to the AAC Association.

Letsby Avenue

23rd Mar 2007, 19:33

I'm sorry chaps - I left the Corps in 99 after some 20 odd years, I only left because the w**ker in Glasgow f***ed me about from ar***ole to breakfast and was unable to give me any of the information I needed about extending and all promises expired spectacularly. I was really p**sed off about having to leave. I thought someone might appreciate a 5000hr QHI who really did want to go AH. As it happens I was out on my ear before I knew it... and it has taken nearly eight years to realise what, as an NCO, my net worth to the Corps really was. Answer. F*ck all!!! Vote with your feet and leave if you feel hard done by, no other action is as remotely effective. There are plenty of opportunities out there, just bite the bullet and go.

ZH875

23rd Mar 2007, 19:50

This is not simply about the money ... Cracking statement, I havent laughed as much for ages.

Of course it's SIMPLY about the money, in fact, I would say, it is ONLY about the money. :rolleyes:

Ron Fenest

23rd Mar 2007, 20:55

Greenie,

I was as surprised as you are about to be when I learned today that there are a lot of officers out there that did not progress to middle rate flying pay until after 4 years as an A/C Comd (5-6 years from flying trg), meaning they will not be affected by the "revised" rules. Basically I spoke to 3 different DE Officers in different departments that all said the same thing so I'm (probably wrongly) assuming this is the case for many others. I should add that these people don't work at DAAvn so there wasn't a party line to be seen.

Personally I haven't even seen the list, nobody in my CoC has mentioned it to me. Can anyone tell me if the list also has DE officers on it ? I'm only asking to see if this problem is confined to NCO/LE aircrew. If so then maybe the people making the decisions won't feel so guilty. If I am right then it would logically mean that ex-Cpl pilots and those taking a long time to achieve A/C Comd satus will be worst hit. I'm not suggesting for one second that it's fair but if this is the case then it will be harder to defend.

Can anyone correct me ?

Sloppy Link

23rd Mar 2007, 21:58

Ron,
It affects everyone from direct entry AAC Officers to retreads. If you still havn't seen it pm me with a fax no and I will dispatch forthwith.

SL

helidriver

23rd Mar 2007, 22:23

Ron,

There are indeed many DE Officers on the list and, quite a few Majors at that, although the majority affected are the former Cpl pilots who could not progress until promoted to Sgt.

Greenie,

'In the meantime, may I suggest that everyone registers their disapproval by cancelling their 'two day's pay' contribution to the AAC Association.'

I think this action is divisive, although I agree something has to done to highlight the issue. I have a couple of mates who are now disabled and the AACA has paid handsomely for adequate facilities to assist their condition whilst at home. The AACA has also recently paid for a deceased pilots children, who was not a AACA member incidentally, to complete and indeed start private education. They also donate an awful lot of money to ex-AAC members who have fallen on hard times in one way or another so I cannot sign up to your option.

h

Eight Eights Blue

23rd Mar 2007, 23:42

I dont believe for one minute that any officers waited 4 years after initial Ac comd to go to middle rate, ifs there is only 3 then they must have been a bit wet behind the ears and should have kicked the pay office into action to get onto middle rate 4 years after wings as everyone else did in the corps.
As for the AACA, I will remain as would like to think that if I ever fell on hard times someone would be there for me. However I agree that someone in the Directorate should be standing up with big shoulders and owning up to the fact that they were the one, or ones, who sold us down the river and then
f--king resign in disgrace before the corps falls from around its feet. You know who you are!!!

A suggestion would be to have a open discussion at the corps birthday when hopefully everyone will be present apart from those on op tours working their balls off for not as much pay as they originally thought they were going to get, a severe chest poking session in the AACA tent.
In fact can any one tell me - If you are a member of the the association does this guarantee you entry to the AACA tent as one year I was told to hoof it as I was a SNCO and only Officers were allowed in. Food for thought.

Ron Fenest

24th Mar 2007, 11:48

Sloppy,

Many thanks for the offer but I have just seen a copy.

Ouch!

Jeep

26th Mar 2007, 05:36

I can imagine the discussions at MOD with this one.

AAC Rep : Er Sir Humphrey, we wish to change the interpretation on Army flying pay so our chaps are not penalised financially, it would be a positive retention measure but it is going to cost more money.

Sir Humphrey: Really, what do the other 2 services do?

AAC Rep: They do it the way we want to do it.

Sir Humphrey: Ahh I see. You just wish it to be the same across the service aircrew?

AAC Rep: Yes

Sir Humphrey: Perhaps they could do it the Army way, might that save more money?

AAC Rep: Well that might get my chaps orf my back .....

Total fiction right?

Eight Eights Blue

26th Mar 2007, 21:21

Any tuther news about the fiasco. Any one heard through the grapevine that all pilots are to receive back pay for P1 top rate from wings and a £50000 tax free bonus for messing us around - No i thought not - wishful thinking again. More people required to comment on this site, it it affects you then comment so at least the readers from DAAvn will know it is fully supported across the corps.

AH7

26th Mar 2007, 21:29

As an army pilot I would like someone to tell me why as an Army Pilot am I being paid much less than my fellow mates in the other 2 services!!! Im trying to get the reason behind this into my head, lets think, same pilots course, same standards, same job, same tours, but totally different pay? WHY??? JPA (joint)??? How on a joint pay scheme can I be paid less than an RAF and Navy pilot??

BRASSEMUP

26th Mar 2007, 21:33

Well i think the powers that be are must be realising there are alot of unhappy chappies out there!

You can put up with the sh*t but as soon as the £ signs are mentioned and you effect what's put into people's wallets, they'll turn around and bite you in the ass!

So stand by the door is open and the feet are a walking and you can keep your carrots!:mad:

AH Veteran

26th Mar 2007, 21:36

Hear, Hear!

I have been reading PPrune for a couple of years now and this has finally spurred me on to register.

It is, frankly, shocking that we are being treated in this way and I, for one, will not be renewing my subscription to the Journal...

AHV

peoplespoet

27th Mar 2007, 12:07

Guys,
Come on, do you really think that HQ DAAvn give a flying **ck what you think. Your opinions count for squat on their horizon. Clearly there are a
lots of concerns and squabbles regarding pay, however in the current climate of jobtastic in civi street, why oh why,do you remain. I'm sure some of you are on time-bars but the majority are not, so just leave.

If your waiting for a reversal forget it, someone would have to say sorry or god forbid admit they **cked up large, and we all know that will never happen.

You are worth more than the treatment your getting, but you are still putting up with it!

I have raised several issues regarding the performance of various HQ eliments within the AAC and have taken flak for my comments, but sorry to say it again, told you so.

We have gone through similar events like this before and the majority held tight in the hope that things would improve for the better, they seldom did it has to be said. This time things are beyond recovery; No FRI, Delayed flying pay and you can look forward to increased operational tours, over commitment and no thanks.

So.............No Thanks....has to be the way ahead!

PP

Front Seater

28th Mar 2007, 06:41

PP,
Usually your caustic posts get my back up, but on this one I am with you. However, what has allowed the powers that be take 'ownership of this risk' (i.e. gamble) is that despite all of what has been said above and despite the significant differences in pay and conditions between Army and the RN/RAF is that there has not been a rush of people voting with their feet.

Of course there are those that are leaving at or around pension point - the 'cushion of a pension' making the decision easier. The Corps had factored those in and actually would like them to go. It always had invested a lot of responsibility in youth, where as the other 2 services have some well seasoned operators/high hour operators in command.

It is the 'bums on seats' and middle managers that would really hurt if they voted on mass. But despite the disparity and high op tempo forecast in the years ahead, the personnel figures look as though they are staying put.

Unless you know differently, I do not see or hear from the crew rooms of any stampede to civvie street (despite a very bouyant market, looking to explode in the airline market). This either signifies that either life is not as bad as portrayed, or the AAC retention measures do work (in comparison to the other 2 Services) or that it is infact true and the AAC pilot (given background, education, character etc) is a more stable Human Resource and not as mobile in the job market as his/her RN/RAF colleagues.

Whatever the reason, I do not think that people are voting with their feet, just whingeing and whining in crewrooms, with a real kick in the nuts for morale, just at the point when the Corps could proudly hold its head up high in the Joint Helicopter arena.

mutleyfour

28th Mar 2007, 07:16

Front Seater, some very worthy points to ponder but I must point out that is isnt always as easy to vote with ones feet spontaneously. There are other considerations such as family, schooling, homes etc etc to consider and so to expect a stampede just isn't realistic.

What is realistic however is when considering the future and weighing up the reasons to stay or go, the arguments for are rapidly turning to against.
Furthermore, this whole vote with your feet argument just isn't condusive to human rights as I should have an option to very easily approach my employer regarding changes to my contract etc. What is needed is for a cessation of out of court settlements and a drive to push the MOD to pay for its errors to all whom have suffered as well as those that will follow.

I shouldnt have to give up my job just to show my discontent as all those that have done will agree it simply proves worthless.

Ron Fenest

28th Mar 2007, 07:34

There is also the small matter of having a licence either via bridging or the long route. I think what you will find now is a lot of people who were debating licencing are now actively seeking it. Lets face it, no-one is going to want to leave and be unemployed just to make a point. I think the effect of these changes will be felt in a couple of years time.

What might be more use at the moment is the prospect of a class action, I'd have no idea where to start with this but surely the disparity between services can't be right, especially since flying training became joint.

MINself

28th Mar 2007, 08:44

I agree you shouldn't have to give up a job that you enjoy just to show your discontent as unless there are big numbers involved no-one will bat an eye lid at 1 or 2 people leaving before their 22 year point. This won't bring the system down! Lets be realistice about leaving, its not to show or to prove to anyone what you think as this is not only worthless but also pointless.
You've got to be doing it for your own reasons forget the good of the service, whether you are leaving because of financial or family reasons get the most out of the services and bother yourself to get a licence at the earliest opportuniuty so you can leave if someone decides to change your terms and conditions without dicussing it :=

ChristopherRobin

28th Mar 2007, 19:51

have licence. will leave at initial pension point (not long to go now). If I hadn't got a licence, same result.

If I'm going to get treated like sh eyte I'll go elsewhere and get paid more for the privilege thanks.

Greenielynxpilot

28th Mar 2007, 22:16

There are a number of factors that the Army as a whole, and the AAC in particular, is not paying sufficient attention to on the issue of retention.

Firstly, for DE officers, the IRC was only invented in the late 90's. Before that, there were two types of officer - short service guys and lifers. However, the present generation of Capts/Majs have already twice been in a position where they have had to consider their prospects outside the military (once on conversion of SSC to IRC, and again on conversion of IRC to Reg C). The decision to stay has not always been easy, and many of my colleagues routinely express serious doubts about whether or not it was the right thing to do. These are the guys and girls who will shortly be approaching their IPPs, starting in 2008. They will have spent a great proportion of their commissioned service regarding their 16 yr points as the ultimate target, not the half-way point of a full career. The 'old guard' of SO1s and above have, largely, held Regular Commissions since they joined, or in some cases from even before that, so they cannot empathise or comprehend quite how many, or how serious we all are about our intentions to leave at the earliest opportunity. I think the Corps needs to radically re-assess just how many carrots it is going to need to keep anyone in beyond the 07, 08 and 09 Sqn Comd boards, and for each and every No 5 board thereafter. Standby for a lot of gapped SO2 and SO1 posts in the future ....

Secondly, for all ranks, the reality is that many people are marrying later, having children later, and many have partners who themselves have significant careers independent of the Army. The 'hooks' of boarding school allowance and subsidised quartering are simply not catching as many people as they did a decade ago, and many soldiers and officers will be reaching their pension points, before having become trapped by a reliance on these benefits. This trend is getting worse (from a retention perspective) and the only solution is to have a rewards package that gives cash, rather than allowances. (FRIs were an example of this trend). Again, the present generation of SO1s and above are already firmly trapped and once again, they just don't have the capacity to fully appreciate that for many of us, continued service is really only marginally more attractive than other options. The change in policy for flying pay progression (and it was a change for the worse, not just a clarification) is just another straw, but one that will break many camels' backs.

Finally, I sometimes think that the old guard (and maybe even some posters on this forum) underestimate our IQs. We all know that under the new JSP 754 regs, flying pay is immediately cut once we PVR, and so to have expected a knee-jerk response of a swathe of resignations is naive. We will go, eventually - make no mistake - but it will be on our terms, when it suits us. The real measure is not whether 2 or 3 people go this year, but whether 20 or 30 will have gone by 2008 and 2009. And the real tragedy is that these 20 or 30 won't be the natural wastage, whose loss the system is designed to cope with, or the garbage that we are glad to see the back of - it will be the best and the brightest ... the ones the Corps really needs to retain if it wants to make progress and develop.

For any CO, their influence is only temporal, but their reputation is eternal. Whether they are derided or celebrated is in our hands, and we must all make them realise that this is the issue on which they will be judged.

In the meantime - play the long game:

Write to HQ DAAvn to express your discontent.
Write to your MP.
Write to Professor David Greenaway (Chairman of the AFPRB), and every other member of the team: Robert Burgin, Alison Gallico, Dr Peter Knight CBE, Professor Derek Leslie, Neil Sherlock, Air Vice Marshal (Retired) Ian Stewart CB, Dr Anne Wright CBE and Lord Young of Norwood Green (and while you are at it, ask them to include an AAC unit on their visits for 2008).
Apply for a transfer to the RAF or the RN.

And above all, make your chain of command aware that failing to resolve this issue will cost the Corps dearly down the line. The four horsemen may not be riding across the lawn at Middle Wallop just yet, but I can hear the thunder of hooves not far off ...

MINself

28th Mar 2007, 23:10

I doubt the chain of command will care if they get 1 or 2 letters from a few DE officers as I suppose they will write this off as some misled officers being idealists or that they were misguided by their SNCOs, equally 1 or 2 gapped SO1 or SO2 posts won't effect the manning of a front line squadron.
For any CO, their influence is only temporal, but their reputation is eternal. Whether they are derided or celebrated is in our hands, and we must all make them realise that this is the issue on which they will be judged.

Whilst I agree with the sentiment of this rallying cry, 20 or 30 extra aircrew leaving a year can be easily absorbed by the Middle Wallop production line, long term your naive if you think anything will change because of a few disgruntled voices!
Do you think the chain of command cares about the noise of hooves?

Greenielynxpilot

29th Mar 2007, 01:07

You are of course right that a few disgruntled voices will not make any difference. That is why we must act collectively to force this to the top of HQ DAAvn's agenda. Have you seen the list? There are nearly 300 names on it. The greatest hypothetical financial loss is over £44k.

And whilst the sausage factory can, quite possibly, churn out an extra 20-30 people over the next few years, these would be 2nd Lts, with 250hrs. With the LOS-based terms of service for officer careers, it will take another 12 years to replace the Majs and senior Capts that will be voting with their feet over the next 36months. This will have second-order consequences and compound effects as those who remain will have fewer and fewer opportunities for service at E2, increased tour lenths and reduced tour intervals, and of course less money than they had been expected for doing it.

What really makes me laugh is that the Corps fall-back option for the last decade has been to commission every Tom, Dick and Harry (these days they prefer to be known as Thomas, Richard and Henry, obviously) to fill the shortfall created by the Corps' patent inability to retain those people it had originally selected and trained for the job. However, the effect of D/AAvn/31/003 is to disproportionately disadvantage precisely those NCO aircrew who we have historically relied on to take up these LE commissions - and whilst I don't claim any expertise in understanding the British NCO psyche, I'm pretty sure that the bunch I've met who serve in AAC Regts are not tolerant of idiots, do not take kindly to being shafted, have very long memories, and will not easily forgive this act of snake-bellied treachery by the Directorate.

Like I said, it will be more than just a few gapped posts at SO2 and SO1 level over the next few years ...

breakscrew

29th Mar 2007, 07:22

Chaps,
I would have thought that it was obvious by now; it is the first stage of absorbing the AAC into the RAF, and the disbandment of a discredited HQ DAAvn and introducing JHC as the Corps focus. We all know that NCO aircrew are an anathema to the RAF, so first, lets get rid of them by having them leave of their own accord under the guise of a flying pay anomaly. And, of course, once the AAC goes, then the next target will be the Fleet Air Arm.Simple really. :hmm:

mutleyfour

29th Mar 2007, 07:27

Thing is that with the arrival of JHC what exactly does the Directorate do, what do they direct?

breakscrew

29th Mar 2007, 07:45

Something in the title may explain; the Joint Helicopter Command commands operational activity and the Directorate directs (as in deals with personnel, airworthiness, flight safety structures and organisational matters, training policy and a whole host of other things that the JHC would not even wish to go near). Apart from fighting PS10 about flying pay, it does a remarkably good job given the circumstances. (Oh and I wasn't paid to say that; I know how hard some of those people work for the Corps).

mutleyfour

29th Mar 2007, 08:12

Im sure they do perform a very good and wholesome job Breakscrew, it just doesn't always seem so out here in the sticks.

MINself

29th Mar 2007, 10:31

It does a remarkably good job given the circumstances

What circumstances are these :rolleyes: would that be the great and the good SO1/2s manning their desks and too preoccupied with their pet projects. At the same time keeping favour with DAAvn and hoping that the end of their own short postings hasten along before anything rocks their own career apple cart, but not so willing to put their heads above the parapet when it comes to standing up for the very people that HQ DAAvn should be trying to retain in the AAC and not alienate because of some short sighted penny pinching.

More worrying still is that their probably right and that DAAvn won't see a mass exodus of their experienced aircrew as these officers and soldiers all have their own careers with families to support to consider. In time this detrayal will be forgotten about and the new pay scheme will be all thats known, unless your one of those fortunate enough to be in a position to be able to leave now because of this last straw.

Unless you hope for this ;)

it is the first stage of absorbing the AAC into the RAF

Heli-Boy1

29th Mar 2007, 12:44

GreenieLynxPilot has hit the nail quite squarely on the head. This issue will bite the Corps squarely on the ass in a few years time. The tractor bean pull of the 16 year pension has got me firmly within its grasp and I would be foolish to sacrifice the pension for the sake of demonstrating my anger. However as a hitherto loyal member of the AAC I am disgusted at the way in which this change has been brought in. This is a disgraceful way to treat the hard working, loyal pilots of the AAC.
And so whilst I will not be leaving in the immediate future, D/AAvn/31/003 has killed off any lingering chance that I might transfer from an IRC to a RegC. I am quite sure that I will not be the only one.

Chicken Leg

29th Mar 2007, 15:23

I am quite sure that I will not be the only one

Indeed you won't be. Next summer for me. :ok:

ChristopherRobin

29th Mar 2007, 19:57

me too chicken leg. But to add to what greenielynxpilot said - he makes a very good point about such things as attitude changes and boarding school allowance - I wouldn't dream of sending my children to boarding school no matter how much money they gave me - so that is completely not a draw for me.

I have got a regular commission - but the writing's on the wall for the corps. I have to say that this pay change is a wonderful 50th anniversary present for lions led by a bunch of chiselers.

Jeep

30th Mar 2007, 06:46

C Robin,

I see you got hit quite hard on the flying pay thingy. Nay luck matey.

Mutley,

Give me a ring or come and see for yourself. I will explain :)

Jeep

mutleyfour

30th Mar 2007, 07:34

Thanks for the kind offer Jeep but my comment about direction was a bit tongue in cheek. :}

Front Seater

30th Mar 2007, 10:25

Greenie Lynx Bloke,
What a good post - genuine and well measured post.

Two's in

1st Apr 2007, 00:21

This deserves to stay up until one of the Falaise Road Assault Group (FRAG)SO1's feels the need to explain how 3,000 hours P1 (750 Night) on a staff desk allows you to shaft or ignore the new blood in the Corps. Although when you need MapQuest to get to the Hangars, why would you even think this was an issue? For everyone who wondered what lowering the Director's post to 1 Star from 2 Star would mean in real terms, all those years ago, here's a good example. Singe would have relished a challenge like this.

RotatingPart

2nd Apr 2007, 12:20

I'm afraid the days of the Corps having real characters with a geniene interest in its future are sadly gone. I wonder what the likes of Gen. Lytle would have made of this whole sorry affair? :=

Greenielynxpilot

2nd Apr 2007, 14:57

A letter to the AFPRB, explaining that over 300 aircrew in the AAC have, in effect, received a pay cut this year, should give us another line of development to pursue.

Even better, 300 letters, each describing the precise figure of the financial loss that D/AAvn/31/003 is going to cost an entire generation of Army pilots, should really ram the point home. (For those of you who have not yet calculated it, I've written a spreadsheet to work out the actual loss in pay. PM me and I'll send you a copy).

At the very least, we must ask them to visit Middle Wallop and/or Wattisham during 2007 to get an opportunity to make our voices heard, and not those cowardly yes-men at DAAvn who have lost any right to represent our best interests.

Admittedly, it is the long game, but continued and persistent pressure is our best bet. I recommend addressing your letters to AVM (Retd) Ian M Stewart, CB - as a former Harrier pilot, he should be able to convince the remainder of the panel that this policy is against the long-term interests of Defence, and that the SO1s at DAAVn and PS10 have quite simply got it wrong about our intentions for continued service in the face of such betrayal. Professor David Greenaway, the chairman of the AFPRB, should also be copied on any letters that are written.

Letters for the AFPRB should be sent to the following address:

c/o Mr P Bush
AFPRB Secretariat
OME
6th Floor, Bay 669
Kingsgate House
66-74 Victoria Street
LONDON
SW1E 6SW

There is a comments form available at http://www.ome.uk.com/contact.cfm although I suspect that a proper letter is more likely to have the desired effect.

Do this - my letter alone will not make a difference. 300 will.

RotatingPart

2nd Apr 2007, 21:23

Nice one,

I'm drafting my letter now :ok:.

AHQHI656SQN

3rd Apr 2007, 09:09

I have recently had the party line from DAAvn and his staff regarding the state of the nation. I am appalled by these recent changes to flying pay and like so many, it is another nail in the coffin lid for me. That isn’t why I’m posting though. I think that before we all shoot the messenger, it isn’t the messenger who has caused the current situation. :hmm:
The Army is broke; no money anywhere and the AAC consumes a vast amount of the Army budget, even more so now the Apache has arrived. Now consider that there are many well established Regiments with friends in very high places who will no doubt have pointed, where necessary, those in the direction of a cost cutting freebie in order to save their own plans and desirable improvements for their own Regiment. I would imagine that with the exception of 16 Bde and now 3 Cdo Bde (thanks to the Apache in Helmand) I don’t think that the AAC has too many friends in Town. :(

I can tell you that there is work in being done to rectify what has been done. I would imagine this change came as a real googly to those in the crease. It doesn’t minimise the impact to those directly affected. More communication about this would not have gone amiss, indeed this forum is read by those in DAAvn; and though unconventional, a post on here would touch the masses. :ok:

Greenielynxpilot, great post :D

Front Seater

3rd Apr 2007, 15:34

QHI 656,
Interesting post - but I must challenge you on your thought process. I couldn't give a monkeys bum for the rest of the Army and how Apache is viewed in town or who is high up in which Regimental MAFIA ruling the roost.
Based on your assumptions then we, as the British Army should have united against the RAF and RN and gone for the jugular on those areas of Defence Spending that are not contributing to real world operations or training for operations. We could all look around and identify the areas (and I do not for one moment think I am having a sideways swipe at Typhoon, MRA4, T45 or the new carriers, because they will vindicate themselves I am sure, just as we did after many a year of virtually everyone doubting us and the Apache.
The point that I think you have missed QHI is that I am more than content to take a real time pay cut for the Defence of the Country (did I just say that!!) - seriously, if that was what our lords and masters had agreed, I would have sucked it up and felt the pain.
But can someone please tell me that if Defence (not just the Army echelons of power) is that broke, why didn't HQ DAAvn stand up to the treasury, top brass with the very simple fact that on operations, here and now we are fighting alongside both RAF and RN aviators, in exactly the same uniform and under the same command.
So if Defence is that broke why doesn't HQ DAAvn and the Army tell the RN and RAF to backfill their shortfall with this so called (still unconfirmed') 'surplus' of Army pilots. When we are supposedly working for the same company under a Joint Personnel Agency can individuals get paid different amounts despite being of the same rank, length of service and professional qualification?
It has nothing to do with the Army/Defence being broke - it is the fact that I am in Joint Helicopter Command and not only do I see myself and my Army Air Corps colleagues not getting any FRI for our efforts, but I also have to take a real pay cut over the years ahead.
Where was DAAvn's Staff when the other 2 Services were obviously fighting their corner - yet again back to being Teeny Weenie Airways, with wheezie boy in the corner!
Sorry QHI - you want us to fight together then pay us together - this is just so deviscive and can only breed ill feeling.

Bottom line QHI - if the Army is broke and cannot afford us, then I am sure that the RAF/RN will find some funds for us and look after its people in a much better way than HQ DAAvn.

Ron Fenest

3rd Apr 2007, 15:59

AQHI656

I think the clue is in the first line of your post. "The party line"

Since when has a party line actually involved the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?. If it ever did then there would be no requirement for a "party line", would there ?

In the big scheme of things (Defence Budgets and spending) the amount of money saved by these new interpretations of old rules really is insignificant. The real life cost of training new aircrew will far outweight any perceived saving.

The question is even more simple than people are making out.

Q. Why are the rules concerning flying pay different for qualified pilots doing the same job under the same Command for the same Queen.

A. ( DAAvn staff to insert implausible long winded answer here)

AHQHI656SQN

3rd Apr 2007, 16:34

Front Seater, normal service resumes ;) Mate I'm not saying I agree with what was said, indeed it has added another crack in my resolve, flying pay cuts, poor flying rates, forced move to Wattashambles does not a retention policy make :=
I simply injected the idea that DAAvn is working to resolve the issue, they didn't request the change, but they do have to handle the fall-out.
Ron, what makes the whole joint thing even worse is that in the RAF, NAVs and pilots get paid the rate of flying pay, now I'm unsure about RN front seat crew, maybe somebody on this forum could advise. Yet two pilots in an Army aircraft, (including Apache) are rated differently. Shocking! :sad:

Ron Fenest

3rd Apr 2007, 16:42

RN Pilots are paid the same rates as RAF, whether they fly a Harrier a SeaQueen or a desk.

Incidentally, they also still get FRI, 50k obviously as there are no oiks about, whether they fly a Harrier, SeaQueen or a desk.

Ohhh or a Lynx!

Not sure about RM but can't see it being much different.

AHQHI656SQN

3rd Apr 2007, 16:46

Ron, I know RN pilots get the same flying pay, but what about the front seat crew on Navy Lynx etc?

Ron Fenest

3rd Apr 2007, 16:48

Sorry AHQHI, I realised after i posted that you probably meant that, I will check with my RN overpaid comrades and get back to you (after Easter as I'm buggering orffff) :)

LOSTinSPICE

7th Apr 2007, 14:07

I have had a letter back from my MP saying he is writing to the Minister of Defence about this issue:D . I've also written to BAFF (British Armed Forces Federation) asking them for assistance as I'm considering taking legal action.

Thanks for the info on AFPRB, I'll write to them shortly.

Cheers.

Nigerian Expat Outlaw

7th Apr 2007, 20:06

I passed out of Wallop in the summer of '86 as an NCO pilot. There were four officers and five (as you had to be then) SNCOs.

The NCOs went to squadrons flying around 300-400 hours a year. One of them went to NI flying up to 700. The officers were expected to fly less than half that. We got NCO flying pay, the officers got a much higher officer's rate which applied to all three services.

Mainly due to Maggie's "Options For Change" Forces Review, I did the compulsory four years and left. Since then I've been flying for exactly the same pay as anyone else with the same level of experience etc. The way it should be. And some of the posts here are on the money (excuse the pun), there are plenty of good paying jobs on the outside.

Now it appears that even with complex types like Apache to fly, all AAC aircrew are being shafted :mad:

NEO

Eight Eights Blue

9th Apr 2007, 10:59

Greenie,

Your obviously the main focus on here and I admire your posts that show complete determination and I for one support you fully.

I have drafted a few letters and need guidance on who and where to send them so that they are hitting the same places that yours are hitting. I also know of one person who has sought legal advice on the matter and is waiting for the next stage so fingers crossed we may be able to get some answers and rectification on this damning subject.

Anybody else who has an avid interest in this topic whould be following the lead set by greenie as it is in your best interests and certainly affects your wallet over the next few years.

Lets keep it up without failing to do our jobs but certainly maintaining our displeasure in the way in which we are being treated.

Lets move forward in unity.

RICON

13th Apr 2007, 20:19

I have been following threads on this site for some time now but have always been reluctant to get involved however this thread has broke me.

I would like to say that it is sad that the last post prior to this one is almost a week old. It seems to me either people have now got bored with it or like myself do not always believe in airing their views in this manor, either way the members of this site at the higher end of the CoC I’m sure will be sitting behind their desks thinking “well that’s the worst of it over and its all calm waters from here on“. I beg to differ. I’m hoping that the reason there has been little interest recently is that individuals are carefully planning their future on this one and seeking some sort of Legal Advice.

It would be a shame if DAAVN was again allowed to sell us down the river with everyone sitting back and accepting yet another change to the regulations which where in force when most of the worst affected individuals qualified from Middle Wallop.

I have been informed by a reliable source that Comd JHC himself has recently visited one of our Regiments to talk about FSI following a recent accident, and this was raised as the first discussion point in what was perceived as an open forum. He left having discussed nothing about FSI but did say the following comments on this matter:

“This is in to stay and is very unlikely it will be changed or rectified, there has been no changes made to the current regulations as this has always been the regulations on flying pay which has been over looked for such a long time”

“The Army Air Corps is currently over strength with pilots so a few pilots leaving will not effect the manning a great deal, it will take a lot more than normal to leave before any sort of FRI would be considered by the AFPRB, and it is unlikely that the amount of pilots who will leave would be any where near the amount required”

“DAAVN will be publishing an article in the next DAAVN Bulletin to explain in more clearer terms the new regulations and why it has now come into force”

I have no reason to believe that the quotes above were not said but I’m sure if this is not a true and accurate account then someone in the higher CoC will be more than happy to correct me and give us all an accurate account of what exactly was said on this matter.

Hearing the above, I now accept that this is not going to be corrected as we all are hoping, and I’m sure if it is the case where the Army Air Corps is so over manned with pilots then they will not be too affected by me Terminating my service and taking the leap into the civilian market where life will be a lot more pleasant and secure for both myself and my family.

I now intend to inform my CoC immediately on return from Easter Leave of my intentions.

It has been a pleasure serving and flying in the Army Air Corps, but I will now happily take my experience to someone who will not only benefit from it, but also respect it.

ChristopherRobin

14th Apr 2007, 07:02

Ricon is right. Don't forget that, rather than PVR, you can write a letter stating your intention to leave at a particular point, e.g. end of timebar. They can't actually do anything until you submit formal PVR paperwork, but the point will be noted.

Does anyone know how to post a survey here, or link it to here, to see how many people are intending to leave at the end of a timebar rather than stay in? I don't know how to but it would be interesting to see and compare to known numbers of active pilots in the Corps i.e. not those flight safety liabilities in HQ DAAvn.

I for one will be voting with my feet!

mutleyfour

14th Apr 2007, 07:54

Some good points Ricon

I am a little perplexed regarding the AAC being over strength as that just doesnt seem to be true. I don't know of any Field Army Squadrons up to strength.

Aside from that though it just cannot be condoned that 1 Arm of HM Forces interprets a document one way and yet the other 2 another.

I am glad you brought this topic back to light as the Easter break has obviously kept people away.

Flying_Padre

14th Apr 2007, 09:19

Ricon, Some heart felt points made - it will be a pity that yet another member of the Corps has been left feeling that the only viable option is to pull the 'black and yellow' and depart to civvie street to be appreciated.

With reference to the visit of Comd JHC to one of the Regiments, I would be perturbed if he left with an impression that manning and flying pay/FRI issues were not causing concern at the 'coal face'. I have been reliably informed that post the recent accident a 'no holds barred' open forum was held at which manning/leave (ability to take or not)/financial issues were just some of those raised as contributory points to generally feeling of malaise.

I live in hope that things will improve.

pax

Cuban Castro

15th Apr 2007, 10:10

I rarely come on this site but this subject forces me too, yes I am on the hit list and was due to move to enhanced this year but not anymore. The upper echelons of the Corps should be ashamed of themselves, as always we get screwed time and time again; never have I witnessed such a lack of leadership in my 20+ year career. I have for the majority of my time in the Army enjoyed myself and given 100+% at all times, in return I expect a fair deal but this decision is absolutely appalling. These kind of decisions enforce outside opinion that we play at it (aviation) and make us the laughing stock amongst the other Services, it's only the professionalism of the individuals at the coal face that change this perception of the Corps.

I will be leaving at the first opportunity (IPP):* and taking my 4000+hrs and Q qual experience elsewhere. Never have I witnessed and never do I want to witness the level of appalling management (loosest possible term) that I have experienced in recent years.

The Corps should be ashamed and in their 50th year, appalling management and incompetence, alongside the belief that the guys on the ground will just accept this decision, unbelievable. Hopefully the merging of DAAvn into JHC will finally give us some form of leadership and remove it as a hiding place for those individuals who clearly have no real ability and having been sacked from previous post are able to operate and come up with ludicrous decisions and policy time after time; time for a clear out I reckon.

Well rant over and bring on the airlines!:)

owe ver chute

15th Apr 2007, 11:55

I've had a few telephone calls to friends in all of the Army Air Corps regiments, and the general feeling is none of them are up to strength. So, if we are being told we are up to full manning, what manning levels are we aiming for, are the HQ’s accepting 75% as full?

Mutley, the other services don't have to interpret the document at all, as they only have one rate of flying pay for pilots and navs. So can anybody tell me why a newly qualified Army pilot gets less flying pay than both newly qualified RAF pilot and newly qualified RAF Nav?

My Army flying has just had one more nail in the coffin lid!:\

Pongochap

18th Apr 2007, 00:30

Still nothing heard on the grapevine - nor should we expect to I guess....

Anyone notice on the 'Policy letter' that the AFPRB is due to review P1 and P2 pay in 2008....

You can guarantee what will happen!

The AFPRB will report that it is barking to have different rates of pay for doing the same job across all three services.

So they will probably get rid of P2 and bring AAC flying pay policy into line and pay us the same as....errrr..... everyone else…..

Of course, all of us seen off after the 'correction' of mid-rate flying pay will not then have this changed back and still have to wait an additional 2/3 years until 2009/10/11 to get put onto middle-rate.

Sigh.............:D

RotatingPart

18th Apr 2007, 01:29

Pongochap,

I feel that any measures taken now to rectify this sorry affair will be too little, too late. As you say, there will still be those who lose out whatever action is taken. Unfortunately the damage already appears to have been done to steel the resolve of many who will pick their moment and leave when it suits them. Good on them too. And with them will go a large chunk of experience and expertise :ugh:. Army Aviation now faces an uncertain future and I for one am sorry to see it come to this :bored: .

Eight Eights Blue

18th Apr 2007, 13:55

A friend who is in the same position recently told me about some of the things he is got going on in the back of all this regarding legal advice so standby for some updates shortly.

He also brough out a very good point that the Pay Warrant stated that having completed 9 yrs service you went onto P2 middle after 3 years. If you then got Ac Comd at the 4 1/2 yr point (year and half later) you remained on P2 middle until 4 years had been completed (marking time as P1 intial not as much as P2 middle). Therefore this reflects the 7 year point at which you would have moved onto P1 middle (7-11) for 4 years and then P1 higher at the 11 year point and enhanced at the 15 year point. This is what they have now said the regulations state so therefore some of the dates that DAAvn sent out are actually incorrect IAW the pay warrant that has been mis read for the last x amount of years. Interesting thoughts and work it out for yourselves so there is at least something we can get back.

Junglynx

18th Apr 2007, 15:12

I thought there was no shortage of Lynx pilots due to the cutbacks in the fleet announced in 2005?

Either way, it's something else that's pushed me over the edge. Top level 'management' being one of them.

I'll hopefully be working for a service which values its aircrew and recognises that training them is costly and time consuming.

RotatingPart

18th Apr 2007, 20:04

Eight Eights Blue,

unfortunately you have to read the wording that was in the pay warrant and JSP752 which is NOW very clear. It actually says after 3/4 years on the "preceeding" rate and of course, subject to the completion of 9 years service. The issue with the Army isn't how long you've been in receipt of a particular rate, more, how you ended up on that rate in the first place :bored: .

It does clearly state that after 4 years on the preceeding rate you are entitled to move onto the next pay band so I've no idea how they'll be able to justify people marking time for 5, 6 or 7 years until the system catches up := .

In a new twist, it would appear that our Aviation Crewman, some of whom have been on a 3 tier system have also been incorrectly paid and are now about to all move onto a flat rate which amounts to less than a fiver a day. Again, where is the incentive for our young groudcrew to advance into instructor roles etc. The novelty soon wears off at which point it'll become harder to retain the experience that's been accumulated and that we could all benefit from in the future. Beginning to see a pattern?

:D

mutleyfour

24th Apr 2007, 16:44

Bump!

Any news?

Greenielynxpilot

25th Apr 2007, 10:07

Well, the good news is that the AFPRB are visiting 9 Regt AAC at some point in the next few months (apparently this was already planned and not the result of any letters written by members of this board).
Still, this is a good chance to make our voices heard by people who really matter. Those of you who are at 9 Regt AAC MUST take this opportunity to explain the full consequence of this decision on your take-home pay and the effect this is having on your morale, and consequently on your desire to stay in for the long term.
The rest of the Corps is relying on you. Let us know how it goes.

mutleyfour

25th Apr 2007, 10:45

Are they visiting before or after the AH crews have departed? Not that its important to me but I am curious if they will interview from across the board and not just Lynx drivers.

Trunk_Monkey

25th Apr 2007, 22:46

My tag should give you a clue to what i do!
Just a quick line to say thanks to all the guys who have fought our corner, you know who you are. It's good to finally see our job getting the recognition it deserves. It looks like there's a light at the end of the tunnel. But i'll believe it when the cash is in the bank!

Eight Eights Blue

30th Apr 2007, 13:19

No news as of yet but at least this will bring the thread back to the front of the forum

RICON

30th Apr 2007, 17:21

It would be interesting to know exactly how many individuals have actually terminated their terms of service as a result of this. A lot of people on here keep hinting that they are going to "vote with their feet" but how many actually have.

I will start you of:

1. Me (RICON)

Ps. Eight Eights Blue: you need to concentrate more on getting prepared for this weekend rather than worrying about getting this thread to the front of the cue.

Eight Eights Blue

2nd May 2007, 10:29

I have completed the training programme all culminating in a weekend of debauchery in a european capital and may I say that I did not impress myself too much.
However, the annual occasion this weekend always brings the best out in me and I will do my very best to uphold the true honoured traditions.

See you there or maybe NOT!!!!

Arthur's Wizard

2nd May 2007, 17:46

RICON

You have demonstrated perfectly why your lords and masters need do nothing more about this.

You've asked for some public support and asked others to display how disgusted you are with your feet and in three days you have not had a single reply to your battle cry.

The problem is that the AAC is overmanned with pilots and no matter what is thrown at you, you will not leave in your droves. Sorry guys, I reckon you're stuck with this one.

RICON

2nd May 2007, 19:04

AW i think you are right.

IF everyone is prepared to take and stick with the current constant changes that the AAC is dictating then that is their decission. This C/S however is not prepared to be bullied into changes which clearly state a difference between the 3 services in JHC, and accept the changes which have been made in order for the AAC to save money to supplement the Apache Fleet so as not to admit defeat and allow the RAF to take command of it. Afterall what else can this be for. It is surely not to sustain the Lynx Fleet which is hardly doing any flying (unless on detachment), or to sustain the Gazelle Fleet which is soon to winde down. Maybe its the Kingair, who knows. Maybe its the AAC 50th anneversary party or the next officers mess cocktail party at Middle Wallop. We will never know as it looks like no-one on here (or at DAAVN) in a higher appointment in the CoC is willing to give any sort of explanation as to why the AAC feels the need to ROB its pilots out of money they duely earn, especially with the amount of detachments and tours on-going at present.

I do understand that it is not practicle at the minute for most people to terminate due to family and finacial commitments, or lack of hours to Bridge, but how much more will people be prepared to accept before even they break.

Good luck gentlemen, I have already observed that the market in civillian street has a lot more to offer than 3 square meals a day and pennies to live on.

I hope all your day-dreams come true and this is resolved promtly for you all.

Ricon.

ChristopherRobin

2nd May 2007, 19:21

sorry - forgot to mention - I'm definitely going as this is the last straw, so it's civvy street for me. Will be signed off by end of the year. You're not alone Ricon!

Ron Fenest

3rd May 2007, 00:58

To be honest I think that the relative lack of interest here on PPRUNE is not indicative of the depth of feeling throughout the Corps. If anyone is using this thread as a measuring tool then real life will catch up sooner than they think.

RICON

3rd May 2007, 04:15

Ron,

Please do not think for one minute I was considering this thread as a measuring tool for the AAC. I understand that a serious minority of the AAC aircrew subscribe to this site, let alone read it.

I was purely trying to decipher between the amount of individuals (as members of this site) that have said they will “vote with their feet” and the actual amount of individuals that where willing to do so.

I have been a member of the AAC for the entire of my career, from A/Tpr through to Aircrew so I am not randomly stating feelings, which seem biased towards the AAC. I am purely stating MY feelings of discontent with the current situation and with over 2500hrs of flying experience so far I now feel my experience would be more beneficial and appreciated elsewhere. As I said, I was purely trying to indicate who else was in the same mindset.

I would also like to take this opportunity to address DAAVN himself (as we all know he reads this).

Tomo,

I seriously hope you do get the MBE/OBE you are graciously trying for (I do not know and do not really care what honours you currently hold as these are unimportant to me in the current climates of detachments and tours. To me you are an appointment not an individual).

I would not take this forum too seriously, as of now there have been 11,721 views of the thread but yet only 158 posts. As any good pilot should be able to tell you this is a poor percentage and at only 1.34% of posts per views I’m sure you will accept that this is well below the expected expenditure of pilots over the next 12 months.

Assuming of course that these views are ALL AAC, which it is seriously unlikely to be, I’m guessing that the 1.34% replies is unrealistic.

I believe you seriously need to decide which figure of terminations will be operationally acceptable and the amount of tasks you require the AAC to conduct in the future, and to which your fine organisation at Middle Wallop are producing such fine qualities of ground crew and aircrew. I for one firmly believe that the decisions being made in your department at present are far beyond what you are expecting in return from your Corps.

What the AAC needs is a leader and adviser in Aviation, who is willing to stand up and defend certain decisions such as arguments with the AFPRB to the current regulations regarding Specialist Pay (Flying) and the discrepancies between the 3 services regarding this pay, and not someone who considers “banning tomato ketchup in the officers mess” more important.

It will only be a matter of time before the press get wind of this situation, and understand the seriousness of Army Air Corps pilots deploying to places such as Iraq and Afghanistan when their total thought process is not on the job ahead.

People have planned and predicted future incomes on expenditures such as mortgages, children’s education etc. on the expected increment of Specialist Pay (Flying). The last thing that the British Army needs is a pilot on detachment worrying about financial matters back home, just because a certain individual has decided to change the criteria.

I believe an immediate response from you on this matter, and the current situation regarding manning, is well over due and should be acted on immediately to save embarrassment and future terminations.

Sir, I no longer remain your obedient servant,

RICON

Ps. If any of the Press wish to know exactly what is going on with the Army Air Corps flying pay situation then please PM me. I will not reply within 28 days from this date (30 May 2007), to wait for an acceptable reply (on this thread) from higher authority within MOD. Beyond that date I will happily inform any interested party on the current situation (except the SUN).

Horror box

3rd May 2007, 07:57

I've done it too. Soon be a civi! No point in banging on, it is not going to change. If you dont like it - leave. There are plenty who will fill your shoes. Sad but true. This is the army and none of us (however much we like like to think different) are indispensible.

MINself

3rd May 2007, 08:43

:D Congrats Horror box, the job market is certainly under going a period of improved opportunites for those with a couple of thousand hours behind them and mostly you won't be asked to live away from home out of a black plastic box, or sleep on a cot bed in a shared tent for weeks on end.

Good Luck :ok:

RICON

3rd May 2007, 12:05

Further to my last post directed to DAAVN, an article in the DAAVN gazette trying to justify the latest CHANGES is not acceptable as I for one did not even know there was a DAAVn gazette, or is that something else you keep close to your chest so as not to disgruntle the lower ranks within the AAC.

Rant over.

FayeDeck

3rd May 2007, 19:56

As a former Corps member I am dismayed and indeed disgusted with this situation. Directorate, you should hang your heads in shame; even if you are merely the messenger.............you are crap messengers.

I will not drone on about how poor this is as many of you have already put this across extremely well..........Greenie in particular I think.

I left due to a perceived lack of leadership present and fortunately this coincided with my 22 point, this beats anything I saw, it truly is a disgrace. Were this a civilian company, heads would roll I can assure you.

Companies in the real world simply do not tollerate incompetence, it costs them money which is a big no no. How fortunate that the people behind this lack of communication and leadership are cast iron, tefloned within a company so big that this is a mere ripple.

Col Comdt, kick some butts.

DAAvn, kick some butts.

CO's, Make some noise, your men are getting royally shafted.

Guys, Make your views known through the chain of command, your superiors have an absolute obligation to forward reasoned argument and feedback.

Gents, the civi market is buoyant, if you do not have a lic, get one, even if you are not yet contemplating leaving, (anyone??:cool: ), it is a nice warm feeling to have ejection handles dangling and waiting.

Rant over, I am truly saddened to see good people being treated this way.

FayeDeck

18th May 2007, 19:43

Seriously gents..................is this thread dying a death.

This needs to be kept in the minds of those with influence.

Greenielynxpilot

21st May 2007, 16:32

Everyone I speak to says the same thing ... "this is ****e, but what can you do?"
Well, for starters, make your chain of command work for you:-
Next time you have a spare moment in the crewroom with your flight commanders; or
Next time you have a mid-year appraisal (or ACR/OJAR/SJAR/whatever) interview with your OC or even better, your CO; or
Next time DAAvn (or anyone) visits your Regiment and you are lined up for one of those singularly naff 'meet the troops' events that only COs seem to think are a good idea; or
If you work at DAAvn, pop round to the SO1 G1's office; or
If you are an Adjutant, the next time you ring MCM Div on some other matter; or
If you are a WO1 in a Regiment, corner the RAOWO at Tea and Toast;
and ask them any one of the following questions - (and demand an answer):
• How much consultation was there (with AAC representation present) over this ‘clarification’? What was the rank of those who represented the AAC at meetings where this was discussed? How many meetings were held, over what time-frame? What other parties were represented? Are the minutes from the meetings where this policy clarification was discussed publicly available? If not, why not?
• Has the wording of the Army Pay Warrant 1964 really been that badly mis-applied by a decade's worth of RAOs and RAOWOs across the Corps, or had it already been amended? How many amendments have there been in the period 1995-2007, and how does one get copies of earlier amendments for the periods to which they applied?
• Exactly how ‘inconsistent’ was the interpretation prevalent between 1995 and 2007? How many officers and soldiers were in receipt of enhanced rates of flying pay on 1 Mar 07, and what proportion of these had had their increment date coincident with the 4-yr anniversary of their initial receipt of flying pay rather than a 4-yr anniversary of qualification as aircraft commander? What is the proportion of all increments awarded between 1995 and 2007, including all those who have since left the service, that were based on a 4-yr anniversary of initial flying pay?
• What precisely is the distinction between the following terms, and where else are they defined other than in JSP318/JSP550?
o Authorised as aircraft commander?
o Employed as aircraft commander?
o Qualified as aircraft commander?
• Were the definitions of these terms intended to define entitlement to specialist pay?
• What precisely is the distinction between ‘P1’ and ‘Aircraft Commander’? Are the terms interchangeable, in all three of the examples above? How did these definitions evolve or change during the period 1995 to 2007?
• How many pilots had their aircraft commander authorisation granted at some point after satisfying the requirements for qualification as an aircraft commander as per JSP318/JSP550 (most commonly due to there being insufficient vacant Aircraft Commander LSNs within that person’s unit at that time, or possibly also because transfer and/or promotion to Sgt was delayed, or as a consequence of some other disciplinary or administrative censure). What is the average period of time for this delay for all those affected? Was it the intention of the Commanding Officers in each case to impose a deferred cumulative financial penalty by imposing this delay? Could this constitute career mismanagement, or an unauthorised, retrospective or illegal punishment?
• Whilst rare, it is technically possible for an Aircraft Commander to lose his/her Aircraft Command status, either on disciplinary, administrative or medical grounds. To what rate of pay would a pilot who presently in receipt of middle, higher, or enhanced rates of P1 pay be entitled if this were to occur? By what formula would his/her entitlement to the various rates of P1 pay be calculated on re-instatement of the P1 qualification / employment / authorisation?
• What is the rationale behind the naming convention for P1 and P2 rates of flying pay? Why is it that a serviceperson who is qualified, authorised and subsequently employed as an aircraft commander after progressing onto the P2 middle rate must remain there until four years at that rate has elapsed? Should not the name of a rate of pay reflect the common English meaning of the words used, and therefore does the logic not suggest that initial P1 pay should be greater than the highest available rate of P2 pay?
• Exactly what is the policy basis for distinguishing Army and RM officers from their RAF and RN counterparts in the matter of P2 pay until qualified as aircraft commanders?
• What is the total amount of P1 pay erroneously paid, for all existing and previous aircraft commanders since 1995? What is the forecast total saving of this ‘clarification’ over the next four years? How many Apache pilots would need to resign on completion of their time bar to completely negate this saving?
In fact, print this out and keep it in your pocket just in case. Constant, persistent, firm pressure is what will force the hierarchy to sort this out. Don't give up on this - if they think we'll tolerate this, what will they take next?

Arthur's Wizard

21st May 2007, 19:27

Constant, persistent, firm pressure is what will force the hierarchy to sort this out. Don't give up on this - if they think we'll tolerate this, what will they take next?

Greenielynxpilot:
An interesting post. The point that I fear you are missing is that many of the appointments you mentioned at the start of this post do not support your view that there is a case to answer. Most, if not all will say that you should think yourself lucky that the money is not being reclaimed and that this solution is the best that could be hope for.

Naturally, this is scandulous, but it will not change. Whether or not it appears so in the Sqn's, the Corps is overmanned with pilots and there is no historical evidence that Army pilots vote with their feet. Ever!

As has been said before on this thread. I'm afraid to say that I reckon you're stuck with this

The RAF are crying out for pilots of all persuasions; why not join the reported twenty odd pongo's that are already someway along the transfer route. You only have to read other threads on here to see that actually, the Light Blue life is no better, but at least you might get paid your worth. Interestingly, due to the over manning, the Army will do very little to stop you gong either!

FayeDeck

22nd May 2007, 08:35

Greenie..........dont listen to that boxxxxks

Keep at it, this is a disgrace that needs to be kept in the open.

The directorate are no doubt gleeful that this has slipped onto the PPRUNE backwaters.

Arthur's Wizard

22nd May 2007, 17:13

FayeDeck

Exactly which part of my post is boxxxxks as you so eloquently put it?

Eight Eights Blue

22nd May 2007, 21:42

I'll answer that one - All this:

Quote:
Constant, persistent, firm pressure is what will force the hierarchy to sort this out. Don't give up on this - if they think we'll tolerate this, what will they take next?
Greenielynxpilot:
An interesting post. The point that I fear you are missing is that many of the appointments you mentioned at the start of this post do not support your view that there is a case to answer. Most, if not all will say that you should think yourself lucky that the money is not being reclaimed and that this solution is the best that could be hope for.
Naturally, this is scandulous, but it will not change. Whether or not it appears so in the Sqn's, the Corps is overmanned with pilots and there is no historical evidence that Army pilots vote with their feet. Ever!
As has been said before on this thread. I'm afraid to say that I reckon you're stuck with this
The RAF are crying out for pilots of all persuasions; why not join the reported twenty odd pongo's that are already someway along the transfer route. You only have to read other threads on here to see that actually, the Light Blue life is no better, but at least you might get paid your worth. Interestingly, due to the over manning, the Army will do very little to stop you gong either!

DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION - OBVIOUSLY NOT SOMEONE WHO IS ADVERSLY AFFECTED BY IT. STAY AWAY WITH YOUR NEGATIVE COMMENTS.

Arthur's Wizard

23rd May 2007, 09:55

OooooooooooKayyyyyyyyyy! Let's be more precise and remember that I am the messenger only!:

many of the appointments you mentioned at the start of this post do not support your view that there is a case to answer. Most, if not all will say that you should think yourself lucky that the money is not being reclaimed and that this solution is the best that could be hope for

Sad but true. The majority of DAAvn think this is fair (at least outwardly anyway).

Whether or not it appears so in the Sqn's, the Corps is overmanned with pilots

Surprising maybe, but also true.

there is no historical evidence that Army pilots vote with their feet. Ever!

Give me an example of when there has ever been a mass exodus due to poor leadership or management?

The RAF are crying out for pilots of all persuasions; why not join the reported twenty odd pongo's that are already someway along the transfer route. You only have to read other threads on here to see that actually, the Light Blue life is no better, but at least you might get paid your worth. Interestingly, due to the over manning, the Army will do very little to stop you gong either!

There are in excess of 20 Pongo's currently going through the transfer process and MCM are supporting those applications.

You seem to be shooting down my points because you don't like them. I don't like them either, but it doesn't make them boxxxxks. You're right, I'm not adversely affected by the change, but again, that doesn't make my points boxxxxks.

I am genuinely as disgusted by this as you, but emotions won't win the day. Voting with your feet will. But as we said above, there's very little chance that that will happen.

Good luck; sincerely.

FayeDeck

23rd May 2007, 12:51

Sorry if you are offended Arthur, not my intention at all.

The "stuck with this" bit is what I diagree with.

I personally have voted with my feet, and it is much greener for me.

Look at 9 Regt about 1 year ago, the list was;

RQHI
DRQHI
ADJT
OPS OFFR
RWO
RAO

Some of it might just be put down to the normal cycle of things.....hmmmmm

Now maybe, just maybe this was a big co-incidence if it were 2 or 3.........but 6 RHQ officers??

Again, sincere apols for any offence caused.

Eight Eights Blue

22nd Jun 2007, 08:50

Is everybody aware of the new ruling on PES A.

Those on AFPS 75 - Straight onto PES A at IPP now instead of waiting to complete 5 years continuance.

Those on AFPS 05 - Onto it when you get to 18/40.

Wonder if this is a trade off for the flying pay fiasco.

Apparently all SNCO's who apply will almost definately get it.

Not sure what the comittment time is though, there was no mention of that on the letter i saw.

Also heard through grapevine that flying pay fiasco is being looked into with considerable scrutiny and maybe revert back to what we know but please dont shoot the messenger - as always, chinese whispers but from a creditable source, watch with caution.

mutleyfour

22nd Jun 2007, 10:46

Had a call from a colleague about this yesterday and all isnt quite as rosey as it appears.

If your on AFPS 05 then PES will suit but whom out of us elected to change as none of us ever thought we'd ever grace the corridors of PESness?

As NCO pilots are only allowed to reach level 22 as the maximum, the rewards if for instance you are a WO1 are almost non apparent.

In order for this to work an option to change to 05 or a raising of the attainable level as an NCO must be in place otherwise its simply a paperwork exercise that will only spoof the foolhardy.

vortexadminman

22nd Jun 2007, 11:16

Is this true though?? Phone JPA (which was fun) they had no idea at all what I was talking about, any one know any more substantial facts.

mutleyfour

22nd Jun 2007, 13:43

Vortexadmin

This isnt actually fully go yet, I believe it to be available toward end of year.

Wafty Cranker

22nd Jun 2007, 16:58

Ah, but which year?:rolleyes:

FayeDeck

22nd Jun 2007, 17:12

I sincerely hoipe that this does get sorted out.............but for goodness sake how can such a cluster get rubber stamped and wheeled out before the troops, apparantly without an adult having looked at the implications on staff morale and hence retention.

If DAAvn were well ahead on this and kept all informed at timely points then fair play to them, all you can ask with bad news is the people are tranparent and honest, and timely with info.

Anyway guys, great servicibility and no getting jerked around awaits you out here if you wish ..........:)

Sloppy Link

22nd Jun 2007, 21:01

PES(A)....Hurrumph. Firstly I wasn't old enough and now I am too old. Coupled with the IRC fiasco last year and subsequently not taking the risk of getting Reg, I have remained AFPS 75. A planned incentive is actually going to make me leave at the earliest opportunity. Perhaps that was the plan! Hey ho.

AHQHI656SQN

22nd Jun 2007, 21:16

I've been involved in the move down south, so I haven't had a chance to really read the letter. I'm an LE over 40 years old and more than 18 years service and signed onto the 05 pension.

When can I get PES?

Many regards.
Tom :confused:

mutleyfour

22nd Jun 2007, 22:13

Check your pm's Tom

I think the crunch is going to be that you need at least 5 years return of service from commencement of PES.

Scotch Bonnet

23rd Jun 2007, 17:16

Tom,
Not quite sure what M4's PM consisted of but by my understanding is that you can go onto PES at your IPP. The "letter" was not that clear as it did not specify (for your case) whether your IPP is now five years hence from being commissioned or your old enlisted IPP or indeed (if applicable) the AFPS 05 IPP......I think it might be wise to speak to Glasgow to get the straight and skinny....Maybe not!!:rolleyes:

mutleyfour

23rd Jun 2007, 19:53

Countdeblades

My point is that passing IPP is not enough to get onto PES. you have to have at least five years of guaranteed service beyond. So if your on 3 years of continuance you will not be eligible. Likewise if you have already passed IPP and are a year or two into a 5 year spell you will not be eligible. It was explained to me that you must be on LSL, Continuance or the like and have 5 years return of service from commencement of PES.

My point to Tom is that each of us have a different case and I dont know if he is on SSC or Reg C but he will have to dot the I's and cross the T's with MCM to determine his case as it isnt as simple as it might seem.

SNCO's need to made aware that they can only achieve level 22 which roughly equates to a WO1 on Enhanced and no further at the moment.

AHQHI656SQN

24th Jun 2007, 22:27

CB & M4, thank you for your words. I will have to call the man in Glasgow, I'm moving house this week, so it will have to wait a day or two before I get time to put my full attention to it.
Once again, thank you.
Tom:ok:

Ron Fenest

13th Sep 2007, 17:56

Apologies for bringing this thread back up but I think that now, some months on from the flying pay debarcle, we are beginning to see the results.

To quote a source very close to the problem "The AAC is haemorrhaging aircrew at an unsustainable rate"

any truth ? thoughts ?

Personally there aren't many people that I speak to that AREN'T looking to bug out at the first opportunity but then again I move in old circles.

And a couple of questions if you don't mind, can anyone confirm or deny that from the day someone signs off their flying pay is stopped ? If it is stopped does anyone know how PES(A) is dealt with ?, I'm assuming/hoping that it is unchanged.

many thanks

Ernesto Guevara

13th Sep 2007, 18:25

Ron,

No need to apologise as its about time this thread continued. At the time of the announcement the 'powers that be' were surprised in the lack of any real backlash. This is easily explained as the pilots are not daft enough to storm into an office and sign off without further investigation and planning. I would suggest from those I have contact with that the planning stage is now over and action will take place in the very near future when time bars finish, 22 years done or job offers arrive.

Regards the stoppage of flying pay. I read today an article on specialist pay in general which stated "the day a soldier commits to PVR, specialist pay is immediately reduced to 50% of the current rate".

With regards to PES my assumption (is the mother of all ........) is as PES is not specialist pay, but basic pay for those on the scheme, it should be unaffected.

Good luck to all

unkind43

13th Sep 2007, 18:43

Ron, A friend of mine:} signed off this week and his flying pay has been halved.
He was on continuance, had he been coming to the end of his 22 then it would not have happened, shafted...... you decide

Ron Fenest

13th Sep 2007, 19:00

Cheers for that unkind, do you know what the required notice is when on continuance or LSL ? 3/6/12 months ? sorry for asking questions I should really know the answers to but the company I'm off to have offered to cover the loss of flying pay while I'm doing time and I don't want to ask officially just yet.

ralphmalph

13th Sep 2007, 19:05

As we near to the official celebrations of the 50th Birthday of the AAC things are not all as they seem.

Granted if you work or live within a 20 mile radius of Wallop things generally all appear rosy....life continues at its normal pace.

However away from the "paradise" that is Wallop things are decidedly worse. I have spoken to many friends over the past 4 months about all aspects of work/home life/whats on Tv!. And all apart from one are throughly dissolusioned about life now and what life is offered for the future. I applaud those who wish to vote with their feet and improve their lot.
If I were not constrained by a Training Return of Service I would be going now. The old clapped out line that people should wait till the pension point is I feel very outdated. Across all services people are deploying and fighting at a steady Op tempo. Gone are the days of the Cold War warrior who got his pension because staying in would not generally require masses of time away in a dangerous place.
The FRI scheme when in place reinforced this, why give someone money when they are 5yrs from a nice pension????...if they are canny they are going to grit teeth and serve the last 5yrs anyway.
There are many young(ish) people serving who have deployed on ops and done the business, the thought of doing that for the next 10yrs does not appeal.
Why not bang out early and start the run towards a new job and pension?

The change in flying pay rules will just make it easier for people to make up their minds to leave. And before the standard "there has never been a exodus from the corps" line, we have not been deployed in so many places and for such an extended period for many years. People are getting threaders!!

It will be interesting to see the proportion of serving/ex members of the Corps present on Saturday. Those who have left the Corps will probably be sporting rose tinted specs, those still serving will probably have a different taste in their mouths!

Ernesto Guevara

13th Sep 2007, 19:16

Ron,

Just to confirm. By pure coincidence I was reading a leaflet on Specialist pay today. It stated that any soldier who PVR's whilst in receipt of specialist pay will have their specialist pay reduced to 50% immediately.

I can only assume that this will not affect PES as this is not specialist pay.

I found the latest Soldier article on the AAC very amusing. A two page pilot recruitment article. They seem desperate to recruit more pilots. I wonder why?

It would be interesting to see if they could muster a two page article on AAC Pilot retention schemes.

Goog Luck

Che'

ChristopherRobin

13th Sep 2007, 19:30

if I can add just another dollop onto the developing sh1t sandwich...

there is a DIN out in the last week that affects your pension. Anyone on AFPS75 in particular. Those of you who are on the old pension scheme will know that after your initial pension point (IPP) you can commute up to 50% of the pension and take it on leaving as a lump sum. However, due to the Finance Act 2004, which took effect on 1 Apr 2006, you can only commute up to 25% of the pension accrued after 1 Apr 2006.

So your lump sum will be less, and the longer past 1 Apr 2006 you stay in the more it will be affected!

Oh and the DIN helpfully points out that if this would have affected your decision to switch to the new pension under the offer to transfer and you would now like to revisit that decision then...you can't!

Naturallement it doesn't affect my decision as I have about 10 months to push.

And another combat indicator that things are going awry? People giving 7 months' notice to leave are being told they may be retained for 12 months. Broon Street want 12 months notice so they can plan their way - a noble sentiment - except that giving them 12 months costs you 50% of your flying pay for those extra 5 months! To be fair to them, they are working on a plan whereby you give 12 months notice but don't take the paycut until 7 months to run, but don't hold your breath that this can be achieved soon.

Still look on the bright side - at least we never got offered the collossal FRI that the RN and RAF got to tempt us away from leaving at the earliest opportunity eh?

unkind43

13th Sep 2007, 21:40

Ron, tis 6 months notice on continuance, if you take into account terminal leave (28 days), resettlement (6 weeks, I think) and any remaining priv leave this can be as little as 3 months left to serve.

Be aware that there is a rule that a new employer can only pay you 28 days pay whilst still serving. I know that some are prepared to bend this rule or offer a golden handshake :) but the more scrupulous tend to stick to letter of the law.

CR, ref the retention, a guy :oh: signed off the same time as me and has only served 4 years of the five that he committed for, result = pay back 50K..... retention...I don't think so.

43

Ron Fenest

13th Sep 2007, 21:51

Unkind

Many thanks for the info it's really useful and has put my mind at rest.

Ron Fenest

13th Sep 2007, 22:28

Just out of interest the main reason I posted on here, other than confirming info for my own rapid departure was as follows: I was phoning some mates today (yeah, I've got some) to see who was heading off to MW for the big party at the weekend. I spoke to 6 different people, all of them very experienced guys and most in quite specialist positions...surprisingly every single one of them was planning to leave in the next 6-18 months and none of them had yet informed their CoC.
.
I was a little taken aback as a couple of these lads were greener than a green thing from greentown only a couple of years ago.
.
Funnily enough one of the reasons seems to be the fact that there is no option to change to AFPS 05 on potential offer of continuance/Veng and this is one of the main reasons I'm off. 3 years ago I was told categorically by the AAC that there was absolutely no chance of continuance/LSL/PESA etc etc and I was advised by pay staff to remain on AFPS 75, this of course was the sensible option when leaving after 22. Units were briefed by MCM that there were far too many pilots and that the AAC was hoping to get rid of a large number over a short space of time.
.
Now, in a complete reversal it looks as though you can stay in as long as you like providing you still have the use of both arms (legs optional).
I can't be the only person whose done the maths on this. In my case there is a potential difference (in todays money) at age 55 of £35k on my lump sum and £8k a year in pension, I've been conservative in my figures.
.
Having done that quick calc I figure I'm better off jumping ship to a job with a good payrise and taking my immediate £15k ish a year pension for the hell of it. It gives me the chance of a second final salary pension. Over a period of 12 years I've worked out I'll be about £200k better off for it, thats my house paid for thankyou very much.
.
The uncertainty in all things AAC over the past few years made it a very easy decision for me.

mutleyfour

14th Sep 2007, 07:02

Ron
Its a very sad yet true tale that seemes to be the result of someones incompetence. I remember the option to transfer and the word from puzzle palace at the time was that we were 80 odd pilots overmanned. Even then I was puzzling as to where they were/are.
It seems once again that personnel come way down the chain after machine in the AAC which saddens me greatly. As an NCO I can only best achieve a level 22 on PES and take the hit on commutation.

My question is does anyone at the Directorate when confronted with these issues ever reach out to units for advice? Has anyone of you ever been consulted or asked what would make you stay? I very much doubt it.

I would suggest that there are those that are combatants on this problem that only seek financial gain for those in their immediate circle and do not look into the shoddy way the majority are treated and in particular us NCO's.

To offer PES to a WO1 for instance whom for arguments sake is a level 7 on enhanced rate of flying pay will only match his present salary. Hardly an incentive especially as a Sgt given the same scheme whom would join in the mid teens can accelerate annually.

May I suggest to those that have any involvement in this matter might like to take a step out of the office and ask the coal face what it would like to see remedy the situation?

Ron Fenest

14th Sep 2007, 09:40

Muttley,

You might as well start. In your eyes what would it take to remedy the situation?

For me a good start would be to uncap SNCOs on PES (A). Why ? Well although level 22 is a decent salary people have a need to feel that they are moving ahead in life, both for personal pride and self-satisfaction. A WO1 on level 22 could potentially sit there for 10-15 years with NO prospect of promotion and NO prospect of a payrise*, I know that this appeals to some people but I regard it as stagnating.

*Annual increases granted

AHQHI656SQN

14th Sep 2007, 10:35

Multey. Last year in AFG our CO at that time sat down with all of the AH aircrew and asked what sort of action would be required to tempt people to stay beyond the 22 yr point. The obvious FRI was mentioned by aircrew, but what was propposed was LSL(A) with an initial 10 year block instead of 5 years, plus striaght onto PES, though nothing was mentioned about changing the level 22 cap.
I thought that had happened accross the Corps, clearly not.

mutleyfour

14th Sep 2007, 10:37

I agree Ron and whilst money talks a great deal some other suggestions that may help are:

A much better co-ordinated system of deployment which allows quality time with loved ones during the immediate weeks before deployment rather than the usual last minute ranges and other niff naff.

A composite support package that looks after families whilst deployed as often they just remain forgotten.

A simple Thank you sometimes works wonders, the manners that I was accustomed to upon joining have long since gone. If a job is completed properly it seems to go unspoken about and yet a job not done well is easily criticised.

A much fairer system of Confidential reporting that includes the reported persons statement at the beginning much similar to the RAF method which enables your own thoughts to be conveyed to the board as well as giving a better indicator to MCM on your aspiritions.

Better accomodation especially the WO's and Sgts Messes which to be honest are some of the worst in the Army.

Esprit De Corps, lets get it back, lets feel part of the team, to feel wanted and important rather than just a number or name which seems the case today.

A newsletter from DAAVN that explains the reasoning to what have become difficult decisions to both make, and recieve, and not just the usual mountaineering and sailing piccies.

Finally to get the information to the men and women in a timely manner. Too often personnel are not being informed of vital career information such as courses available, PES, LSL etc etc and the system of application is stuck in the yesteryears. We live in the time of IT and yet still have to get letters signed, records dispatched to APC Glasgow and chase your own rear to get even the simplest of tasks achieved.

There will be a thousand other things Ron that I have missed and others may expand on but we need to get heads out of the sand and fast.

mutleyfour

14th Sep 2007, 10:43

AHQHI

Sadly the rumours I am hearing are that the level 22 cap hasnt and probably wont be addressed. Something to do with the RAF being asked to downsacle theirs in order to encourage Officer Pilots to take a more career pathed time in the service.

If true then it would indicate that the level of thought to our own particular importance in the Corps has not really been addressed and probably won't be until there are representatives from NCO pilots in DAAVN and not just Officers.

The whole carrot thing with PES just doesnt work for a WO1 pilot whilst capped at Lvl 22 and yet the facitilty to encourage people to stay on would be much greater with an increase even if just a couple of more levels.

MaroonMan4

14th Sep 2007, 10:49

Hey Guys,

Before we go around this one again (although I can understand why someone has posted to get it back onto the front page/back into public domain) just remember that if there was a real, quantifiable shortage that could be proven to bean counters, politicians and those that do hold the purse strings - then you can bet that there would be other retention initiatives put into place (PES(A)/FRIs etc etc).

But whether smoke or mirrors by the Air Corps Personnel departments (and it very rarely is just one individual) or whether there is a genuine surplus of aircrew (or more to the point, the rationalisiation of AH or the projected crews for BRH have indicated a reduction in aircrew requirements) then it is purely market forces that are in force here - just as with any other HR department in other company.

It is interesting to note that if you attempt to transfer to the RAF/RN that you can get an FRI - so there is obviously a little concern there as it is widely known that the other 2 Services are rubbing their hands with glee at the incomptence of leadership and personnel management as more and more course see inter Service transfers.

Despite having its 50th Anniversary as we type, the sad fact is that the Army Air Corps is ripping its heart out and is morally bankrupt. And yet it still expects people to go the extra mile to make it look good and only a year ago it did have credibility as an Operational organisation that was a true force to be reckoned with.

It is now strugglingto keep both man (and women) and machines fit for purpose and therefore when it is threatened (which it will be as AH numbers will get reduced and the very low numbers of BRH will in effect make it nothing but a an 'Army Wing') then there will be very very few people that will actually defend the Corps and its organisation and will welcome change an integration with the RAF and RN that appear to be looking after their aircrew (relatively speaking).

Many happy returns to the Army Air Corps, have a superb party - but my advice would be to make the most of it as you will not be around in the next 10 years, let alone 50.

So - if you dont like what your Corps is doing then stop dripping - everyone knew that it was a 'press to test' exercise and so far you can drip as much as you want, but the PVR figures are not making anyone lose a heart beart or raise any eyebrows. If you think that others leaving may force a situation then you are all playing a waiting game where no one is actually leaving (except those that are being quantified as natural wastage - at the end of their 22). So if it is that bad, get off your @rses, do your licences, look in Flight or look for another career and leave. Having a good chunter on here (same old faces, same old names) is getting you absolutely nowhere as no one cares.

Sad - but that is just the way it is fellas.

:{

mutleyfour

14th Sep 2007, 11:01

MM4

I disagree with your last couple of paragraphs, I may have a rant about conditions etc but as I said on an earlier thread I dont and shouldnt have to leave to make that point.

You're wrong about the press to test as the shortage has already begun and is noticeable in the Squadrons.

lastly if all things in your garden are rosey then I am happy for you but please spare me the like it or lump it routine as its a little repetative in these forums.

MaroonMan4

14th Sep 2007, 11:13

Mutley,

No it is not the 'like it lump it routine' it is (very sadly) the reality routine - since the very first post many months ago ask yourself has anything really changed. Under the freedom of information act (oh yes DIN boys it works both waythis information management malarky) ask to see the PVR figures.

There is absolutley nothing to see, no evidence, no proof, no requirement - you are perceiving shortages and departures from the Service that actually fall into the 'natural wastage' category. It is not my Corps, and I do feel genuinely sorry for you (and trust me I am not being condescending) - but if you look at what is happening with AH (effectively a reduction in the size of the force) and then also compare the numbers of aircrew required for the gazelle and Lynx era to the numbers predicted to operate a BRH fleet you will realise that actually it is not undermanning, but reconfiguring for a future Army Air Corps and therefore natural wastage or people voting with their feet will have to go a long way to get the kind of retention initiatives that have been dreamed off on this thread.

Look around you - look at the fleet 10 years ago - look at the fleet now - and have a look at the fleet in 5-10 years time.........then do the maths and you can see why this thread is falling on fallow ground.

You are speaking to the wrong shepherd!

HEDP

14th Sep 2007, 12:53

Given that the first AH unit trained had in the order of 42-43 aircrew trained of which only 15-ish remain, you would think that the powers that be might have taken note by now. Shame nothing was put in place before the demise of Dishcloth...........

mutleyfour

14th Sep 2007, 14:31

MM4
I need to explain a few things that have come to light recently.
It would appear that the AAC made a decision about having more Officer pilots than NCO a few years ago. One only has to look at the names on the Pilots courses for the last 5 to 6 years to see evidence of that. We used to be 60/40 split in favour of NCO's but alas no more.

Along with that is a miscalculation a while ago that indicated overstrength was apparently wrong and we are undermanned even allowing for BRH.
Now here lies the problem: Ever since the birth of the Corps the NCO cadre have been the backbone of flying allowing the Officers to progress along standard Army lines including various spells behind a desk etc. Witht he increase in Officer manning that backbone has shrunk meaning less pilots at front line whilst officers go through the normal hoops. Add to that the fact that most of todays young Captains and Majors just want to fly and so are either leaving or transferring you can see the problem.

Now the fact: AAC MCM are actively encouraging NCO's to stay beyond 22. This has been poorly received as at offer to transfer to AFPS 05 it was made clear no such offers would be in place owing to the supposed overmanning. Hence we have to stay on AFPS 75. Add to that the option to go onto PES but being capped at 22 the package isnt quite as attractive.

You might then ask why am I here? Well I'm the foolish one that likes what I do. So why moan I hear you ask? Because this needs to be rectified and soon in order to keep Army Aviation where it should be..in the Army.

wg13_dummy

14th Sep 2007, 16:01

What happens to the Corps if BRH gets cancelled? Can you see the Corps lasting with only one type (excluding the dribs and drabs of indep flights)?

As far as I'm aware, the BRH 'contract' is only for 3 aircraft at the moment. Until AW can demonstrate that its up to speed, we have no obligation to commit.

Ironic that in the Corps 50th year, its not looking very rosey for the future at all.

ChristopherRobin

14th Sep 2007, 22:09

and with the post of DAAvn about to become a one-star directly under the command of JHC, as opposed to where he has sat until now, what does that tell you?

Although I have to say that, for the people in the corps, I think that is a good thing - might modernise some of the attitudes that continue to hold sway in the increasingly anachronistic portakabin city.

Ron Fenest

15th Sep 2007, 15:14

MM4
All points understood about natural wastage and the lack of evidence concerning shortages.
One thing I must say is that all the guys I referred to in my post, and myself are NOT leaving at planned points, ie: not at the time the AAC think we are due to leave. Most of us are in fact not due to leave until approx 2015, admittedly the majority will be way past IPP at the time but they are still up on the manning board as "in" for the duration.
From a purely selfish perspective I don't suppose it matters a jot anymore as I've made my decision and I know that I won't be missed. And actually at this point in time there is no incentive planned or available that would make me stay. It's why I've come around to this way of thinking that is the problem.
Treat people fairly, keep them informed, ask opinions and act on them when possible/feasible, never mess with money, leave, families or food.
It isn't that hard.

AHQHI656SQN

16th Sep 2007, 16:45

After a great weekend at Middle Wallop, meeting with friends that I've not seen for a while, the one thing that struck me was just how well the Australian forces are going to do out of the UK Apache program!

Did anybody mention the light switch? :(

vortexadminman

16th Sep 2007, 20:13

Bloody right the Aussies are doing well out of AH drivers, not only AH drivers either but a few of our other type drivers including planks are shooting off as well. Still everythings rosey !!

owe ver chute

17th Sep 2007, 20:49

Good to see lots of old faces over the weekend. A sign of growing old, seems to be that of all the friends I spoke with seemed to be getting out of the Army, than staying in. :ugh:
Mutley 4, you make some very interesting points, I hope DAAvn read them. Regarding the capping at level 22, I was once told that it was set that way to appeal more to Sgts, remember when we had lots of 22 year Sergeant pilots, who would be very happy to be on PES and getting the same pension as a WO1, without getting off their arris, just plod along fat dumb and 'appy. ;)
The problem with that is that people like you, with drive and ambition want more. You want more?
Mutley, you can't please everyone. The problem is, after this weekend, I don't know anyone that is happy!

Ernesto Guevara

2nd Oct 2007, 19:19

Apparently DAAvn has announced that as of April 08 the services will come in line with regards to flying pay.

The only specific we were told of was that RAF and RN will not receive flying pay until Converted to type (CTT/OCU) as per the current AAC practise. Cant see that going down to well with those currently at JEFTS/DHFS.

No further info was passed on but I hope that the P2/P1,tour length and commander status issues are resolved as this is what really matters to those of us currently doing the job. This could be good news but I am not holding my breath.

Che'

Bofaboy

2nd Oct 2007, 20:23

Thanks for the info but I am not sure this information from DAAvn helps the folks that have been caught in the middle ground; it seems as though the Army are just dragging the RAF and RN down to the AAC's level which means the cheapest option. It will be interested to see what happens to the folks caught in the middle ground from the RAF and RN. I assume it will be no recovery action for the folks that have got it and tough luck on the rest who are awaiting to move up levels.

Or looking at it differently/cynically, is DAAvn trying to suggest that those people thinking of jumping (the list is long) that it will not financially benefit them by making the move from AAC to RAF?

AHQHI656SQN

2nd Oct 2007, 21:00

The change mostly impacts those who would get flying pay from the 72 week point. RN & RAF now get flying pay post CTT, same as Army Air Corps. Just to add, the pilots on CH47 CTT have to wait the longest.

PumpCockMixMags

3rd Oct 2007, 11:45

As an outsider looking in, the AAC have always been a professional bunch who I have the utmost respect for. I have been in the RAF a long time and worked alondside you guys on many occasions and it seems that the AACs main problem is the poor attitude your lords and masters have towards you and your ability. You fly, you operate in the same OOA locations alongside us yet you get a bum deal. I feel for you, I really do but before you leave and shut the door on it, rather than turn out the light howabout jumping across to the RAF or FAA because if you choose to vote with your feet to prove a point, your lords and masters would have a herd of cows.

COME ON IN THE WATERS LURVELY:ok:....

AHQHI656SQN

3rd Oct 2007, 17:07

PumpCockMixMags. If the water is so "LURVELY", how come there is so much room in the pool?
;)

ralphmalph

3rd Oct 2007, 20:28

Interesting that it took a major uproar/change of flying pay regulations in order that we in the AAC get paid the same as our compatriots in the other two services!. That is if it is really true!.

Was talking to an RAF friend today and he made a very valid point:

Given that AAC aircrew recieve the lowest rate of flying pay upon completion of CTT, how much money do we actually lose out on for doing a comparible job.

We compared our last 6 years of flying since qualifying.

Army: £6.77 upon qualification untill Ac Comd Qual ( 2 years = £4,942)
£12.95 upon Ac Comd status ( 6 years = £18,907)
Total to date= £23,849
RAF/RN: £12.95 upon qualification ( 4 years = £18,907)
£21.97 after 4 years on preceding rate (2 years = £16,038)
Total to date= £34,945

He made a very good point that the earning situation/disparity will only get worse as time goes on and that getting to Enhanced rate even 2 years earlier widens the gulf considerably over a full career!.
If someone can give me a straight forward answer as to why being an army aviator means that I get paid considerably less that Light/Dark blue, then I am all ears!.

Interesting that if I transfer to the RAF/RN I would immediatley go onto the next rate of pay by virtue of my wings qualification date!, I would eat my frickin hat if that is going to be implemented in April 08!.

No doubt we will have to "dry our eyes" and take the fact that we are army aviators as reward enough. Sadly even if I wanted to swell my chest with pride it still would'nt be as big as my oppos wallet!.

;-)

Ralph

AHQHI656SQN

6th Oct 2007, 10:06

Ralph check your PMs.

ralphmalph

9th Oct 2007, 23:12

Bump!.... back to the top

Flarechecklevel

29th Oct 2007, 23:20

After reading the last 3million messages ref the new pay farce......I can only wish you guys still serving all the very best. You have been and are being...poo'd upon heavily. I have only been out 3 years after 17 as a "true blue" and I loved every single day and still miss a lot of things about the life. The difference now is I have a life...my own. I loved the Corps and EVERY person I met wether I was refueling, door gunning, teaching in the training wing or flying. Good luck to you all with the farce that is your management. The water out here is clean, clear, warm and much better paid ! and getting a salary for what is only 6 months of work is well worth it.
Stay safe and dont take it from them......do it. As another person said...vote with your feet. Good luck and best wishes to you all.
FCL

Raincheck

29th Oct 2007, 23:50

I walked to the RAF many years ago, retired at 50 and do not regret a minute of my time. The Army was brilliant I had a fantastic time, lots off hard work but times to be remembered . The RAF was also a fantastic time with lots of hard work and times to be remembered. We were working ultimately for the same company and it is ultimately what standard of life and what you ultimately want to achieve that must govern your decision. The decision is ultimately yours.

Bofaboy

30th Oct 2007, 17:56

I am in an optimistic mood; has anybody had any update on whether this measure might be reversed for the 300ish people that were told there flying pay increment date was shifted to the right?

:ugh:

ralphmalph

3rd Feb 2008, 19:20

Been a while since this thread has been discussed.

After a rumour that the AAC will be reviewing its flying pay rates/regulations to come into line with the RAF/RN, nothing has been heard.

I find it very hard to believe that the esteemed workers in puzzle palace at DAAvn are not working all the hours god sends to redress the unfairness between services!.

But then they are probably scratching their heads trying to work out why a large number of AAC officers are either leaving or transferring.

Anyone heard any news?.

timex

3rd Feb 2008, 20:36

Heard a rumour that the AAC were considering getting rid of P2 pay?

Pongochap

29th Mar 2008, 19:32

All change.

A paper has just come out stating that all AAC pilots as of of April 2008 will receive the same rate of flying pay from wings as their RN or RAF counterparts.

All those currently on the 'NCO' rate (?) will be brought into line at that point so all will receive what the AAC currently terms as Ac Comd pay.

Long overdue and well done someone for finally pulling their finger out.

However, no guidance yet seen for those of us hugely disadvantaged by the change/refocusing of policy that meant that mid-rate flying pay kicks in 4 years after a/c comd and not wings (as was the original point of this thread).

Many previous posts provide the detail but yet again having met and served with the RN/RAF counterparts from Shawbury on Ops all over that you realise yet again the amount that means and will continue to mean. Mainly as we are already 2 years behind on mid-rate (then higher rate etc...). Even better is meeting the many officers who have no intention of flying (let alone operationally) in the near future (or indeed since their first flying tour) yet are on or approaching enhanced rates of flying pay.

Not that that is frustrating. At all.

Any updates gratefully received....