Next Years Pay Award

[ExRAFAC]

In light of the Police pay debacle, I thought it might be about time to start whinging about next years pay award. Bet it'll be a similar tale for us!!

[airborne_artist]

ExRAFAC - I remember my father commenting about the XXXXX politicians who would stage the armed forces pay award to save money - in the 70s. Nothing new about that trick. Can't see Swiss Des being that cheap, surely? :uhoh:

[WPH]

Could be fun covering their duties if they opt to go on strike!:)

[Dogwatch]

Not if you have to do the paperwork :}

[minigundiplomat]

Can't see us getting f@@@@d over next year. Can see a large rise in installments, but the manpower within the military is currently in freefall, and the pressure must be on to arrest the descent before the situation droops below min levels.

[Ali Barber]

Everyone will be after postings to Leuchars or ISK so that their pay awards get back dated.

[South Bound]

Not sure they have the balls to give us a rubbish pay rise this year. They would love to and they clearly resent every penny they pay towards Defence, but even the politicians must see that something needs to be done to keep enough of us in for the future. I guess something significant across the board (or at least up to and including SO2 level) and no great increase in SFA/SLA charges etc.

Interesting debate though - how much pay rise would it take to keep you in??? How poor a pay rise would hack people off enough to leave???

[dallas]

Interesting debate though - how much pay rise would it take to keep you in??? How poor a pay rise would hack people off enough to leave???
I think this is the crux of the issue. Giving HM Forces 5% as a retention measure (versus the 2ish% for the rest of the public sector) would be purely a political move so Des et al can say they care, we are brave, doing a difficult blah blah blah. In reality I don't know anyone who would actually be retained by pay, short of a 20% raise - pay isn't the issue.

[South Bound]

Agreed, interesting though sitting on the inside. I vote for the 20% though, make a nice change to my pension!

[Wingswinger]

Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose.

The pay and benefits weren't enough to keep me in back in the 1980s. And don't let anyone tell you that the Armed Forces Pension Scheme is second to none, either. It isn't.

It's sad to have to say this but nothing will change until the forces have an association/union with negotiating power and teeth. But that goes against the grain, doesn't it? It did for me.

Sorry, folks, but the politicians don't value you as much as they should. Your only recourse is to take what you have learned, build on it and then walk out of the door.

[snapper41]

What happened to that armed forces association that started up a year or so ago? Has it died?

[Kitbag]

What happened to that armed forces association that started up a year or so ago? Has it died?

Seems they are still active, see here: http://www.baff.org.uk/index.htm

I suppose the only way to keep something like that going is to support it, although if everyone in the Services did it would still be v small compared to many employees representative groups (unions etc).

[blogger]

Pay rise! ......Why.

Troops returning in droves from Iraq has the hand over goes on.
All that new kit promised by Gordon and friends for Afgan.
Our leaders stating we are not over stretched.
Increased spending on Troop housing back home.
All those smiling troops standing behind Gordon in Iraq and Afgan during the last few days showing how happy they are to be away at Xmas.
Medical care has never been better.
Fantastic new pension scheme.
Fantasic award wining JPA system.
Reduced home to duty because petrol is getting cheaper.
Great big sand pit to play in.


Pay rise come off it every ones so happy troops would take a pay reduction just to stay in the job.

After all inflation is less than 2%...... Gents, Gordon tells us so. :ok:

[dallas]

What happened to that armed forces association that started up a year or so ago? Has it died?
It's still going but has failed to seize the initiative, IMHO - it's not as if they haven't been handed a bunch of opportunities to get get into the limelight either!

The association's biggest problem is they won't be listened to (apart from maybe by Breakfast News) unless they either seize the limelight through groundbreaking initiatives and do something tangible that amounts to more than just 'visions' and mission statements. No offence to the bloke who currently runs it, but we've not heard or seen anything of you!

The government is essentially reactive, only spending when it stands to gain good PR (Olympics) or see-off bad (Inheritance Tax) and it has no need to spend any more than the minimum on the forces because it knows both the law and forces' can-do are on their side. The association lacks the firepower of other professional organisations by not being able to put any threat behind its 'demands' a la 'no overtime'. Neither the public or the members of the forces would accept this anyway! Besides, in many ways our lack of representation is a strength.

Although a central component is money, that alone is not enough. Better would be the paradigm shift to accepting Britain's armed forces are a key component of the much sought after Britishness that Brown is looking for, in the same way Big Ben, roast beef and cricket is. That part of the link is loosely there, but needs to be strengthened in the national psyche. The missing part is including the forces in the winner's enclosure of proper funding, alongside the NHS and schools. The government could do this and I think it would be widely popular (note: Mr Brown, searching for populist policies), while it would also fund Britain's desired position on the world stage. But behind it has to be the will and this is lacking.

Unfortunately Defence is the silent whipping boy for increasingly stretched government funds. More vociferous causes get the money, irrespective of their propensity to waste and mismanage it. And in the mean time the gaps in Defence are being plugged by our good will and sense of duty. What is not readily recognised, or perhaps worried about by transitory governments, is good will is a finite resource.

[minigundiplomat]

I agree with Dallas on the whole. The important thing is, The Armed Forces were around long before Little Gordon learned that 2+2 announced 10 times made 40 Billion for the NHS on his toy abacus. They will be around long after he and his party of social engineering, low ability, spin obsessed and quite frankly, unfit for purpose misfits have gone.

It just puts lives and careers in danger NOW. But as long as new stuff is announced, and the public are reassured, it will be ok. Expect a 3.5% rise, staged over two years. Seems popular with the AFPRB.

[8-15fromOdium]

On the subject of associations there is also this one:
http://www.uknda.org/

There are also a number of petitions about MPs' pay on the No10 Petition site, this looks the most appropriate:
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/MPpayrises/

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Cap MP`s pay rises and bring them inline with the REST of the public sector.


Be nice to see the MP's lead by example...

[Mick Strigg]

I seem to remember, that after a string of staged pay rises in the 80's & 90's, that the Armed Forces were made a promise (by Blairs government) that it would never happen again.

Will Brown renege on that promise?

[Megawart]

Mick, the so-called 'covenant' between the government and the military has been so completely and utterly broken by this government that it's no longer worth the paper it was written on - if it were ever written at all!

Definitions:

1. A binding agreement; a pact.
2. Law
a. A formal sealed agreement or contract.
b. A suit to recover damages for violation of such a contract.
3. In the Bible, God's promise to the human race.

So surely as with any covenant (even a verbal one), there is a penalty to be extracted when one side breaks it?

Therefore, can we not demand compensation in the form of wages (through the AFPRB), as recompense for the lack of improvements which were promised us - in other words, isn't it time for a big hike in the X Factor - and I'm not talking about Simon Cowells trouser's either!

We are fighting 2 wars after all!

Trash

[dallas]

The other option could be to vastly increase LSSA and other deployment payments - that would have the added advantage of not rewarding malingerance (adj.?), for which there is no disincentive and an undue reliance on the seemingly medieval quality called integrity.

[minigundiplomat]

Great Idea.

Double the Op Allowance and LSSA and I would be a very happy man.

[VinRouge]

HEre is a novel idea. How about we dont pay Income tax, full stop whilst we are on det? Sod Op allce. Its a pitance.

And where is my bloody NATO pay for the 5 months in afghanistan whilst a bloody NATO OP?

[Shadwell the old]

Having completed my "career" in the RAF, I decided that I was too young to retire, so I now work offshore. So what are the benefits?

When I leave home on travel that is organised for me with no input from me, I do not pay for anything. I work off the coast of Denmark and my travel to Aberdeen by train is paid, along with my air fare to Esbjerg (from Aberdeen). When I arrive at Esbjerg, as there is an overnight stay before I go to the rig, there is a paid for taxi waiting to take me to my hotel where I have a single room and £25 for a steak meal and non alcoholic drinks. The following morning I have breakfast and a taxi to collect me and take me to the airport where the helo takes me offshore.

On the way back if I have an overnight stay caused by poor weather I go to the hotel again where I have a meal and alcoholic drinks paid by the company, plus an extra days pay.

We are still awaiting this years pay award which will be backdated. 8% has been rejected and the norm is probably going to be 13% for the year, plus £1000 payment every 3 months in lieu of holiday. I get overtime at time and a half if I work beyond my rostered 12 hours per day - no question. If I agree to do extra days, I also get time and a half. For working Christmas and new year, I get an extra £75 per day for the 3 days considered holidays. Do I feel valued? Yes. My pay is always correct and paid on time - no waiting for it to catch up. We were delayed leaving the rig by 6 hours last trip, and the result was an extra days pay for all concerned. And as for the pension, they match your contributions to 5%, and give you a 10% of your annual salary supplement into your pension account at the end of the year if the company makes a profit.

This is not a recruiting drive for offshore, but merely to demonstrate the contrast in the way we can be dealt with by a caring employer. When I tell the guys on board the rig that the Services were awarded a 2.8% pay rise this year, with little prospect of anything better this coming year, they think I am having a laugh.

Merry Christmas to you all and fly and stay safe.

[adminblunty]

The Tories gave us a few split pay rises in their last few years in charge, So don't expect any favours from them. Oh and they did the deal with Annington homes and closed military hospitals. Basically we're screwed either way.

[spanners123]

Shadwell the old
Those are the exact reasons I will be joining the off shore crowd very soon! Quite a few friends off shore, some of them ex-RAF, they say there is no comparison and they wish they had gone off shore years ago!;)

[KNG2007]

It's still going but has failed to seize the initiative, IMHO - it's not as if they haven't been handed a bunch of opportunities to get get into the limelight either!


The association's biggest problem is they won't be listened to (apart from maybe by Breakfast News) unless they either seize the limelight through groundbreaking initiatives and do something tangible that amounts to more than just 'visions' and mission statements. No offence to the bloke who currently runs it, but we've not heard or seen anything of you
!




Unlike BAFF who have been at the forefront of many leading headlines. Not only commenting on but also making them through direct action, with out the need for window dressing using high profile (highly paid I suspect figures like the UKNDA use. Having big biceps is great unless you can properly exercise it.:)

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3056720.ece (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3056720.ece)

Gurkhas will be sacked early to reduce their pension rights



Michael Smith


THE Ministry of Defence (MoD) is facing legal action over plans to cut the pensions of Gurkhas by sacking them three years before they are due to leave the army.
The move, which means the MoD will avoid having to pay an ordinary Gurkha soldier more than £200,000, is to be challenged in the courts by the British Armed Forces Federation (BAFF).
The policy was introduced by civil servants after they were forced to increase the Gurkhas’ pay and pensions to bring them into line with the rest of the army. An official briefing document on the new pension scheme shows that 80%-85% of Gurkhas will be discharged early, so missing the better payments.
They will lose out not only on the immediate pension they would get after 18 years’ service but also on a lump sum departure payment of the equivalent of three years’ pension.



Gurkhas have been put on the new army pension scheme, which applies to all other soldiers, after years of campaigning by their supporters. The full pension will be worth around £6,500 a year for a rifleman, the basic Gurkha rank – plus the one-off departure payment.
In the past, most Gurkhas served only for 15 years, after which they received an immediate pension that was much smaller and worth only about £1,200 a year for a rifleman.
But Gurkhas on the new scheme will now get nothing until they are 65, if the MoD decides they are among the 80%-85% who are to be thrown out at 15 years.
For most Gurkhas who join the army at 18, that will deprive them of a total of 32 years’ pension money, £208,000 for a basic rifleman, and far more for an NCO.
The briefing document says the army will recruit far too many Gurkhas if they are allowed to serve to the 18-year point, so most will be discharged after 15 years with no immediate pension and no departure payment.
The ready availability of recruits for the Gurkhas among young Nepalese men has led the MoD to decide to discharge older soldiers early rather than cut the number of recruits.
A “manning control scheme” was used from the late 1990s until 2002, in an attempt to cut the MoD’s pension liability by preventing some soldiers serving to the point at which they received an immediate pension.
But its deliberate intent to cut pension payments was exposed in 2002 after a series of cases in which highly experienced soldiers with extremely good reports were thrown out at a time when the army was desperately short of such men.
Ministers ordered civil servants to stop using the scheme to discharge good soldiers and it has not been used since. It has been revived specifically to control the numbers of Gurkha soldiers.
Doug Young, the BAFF chairman, said it was staggering that “the MoD should consider reintroducing their discredited manning control policy for anyone, let alone for Gurkha soldiers only. This raises several important legal issues, not only racial discrimination, serious as that would be”.

[Roland Pulfrew]

Gurkhas will be sacked early to reduce their pension rights


Proof, if proof were needed, that there is no-one in Government (and more and more in the civil service) that has one iota of honour, decency or moral courage. If true, this is utterly, utterly disgraceful.:(

[TalkTorqueTorc]

I think a good pay rise is necessary, maybe around the 3.5%-4% area.

By itself it may not keep people in but if we get a poor rise you can bet it'll be the straw that broke the camels back for a lot of people and even more would vote with their feet.

Mind you that seems to be the Governments policy these days. Experience costs so why not get less experienced people to do the same jobs?

[OCCWMF]

Fantasic award wining JPA system.

Please tell me that isn't true!:eek:

[VinRouge]

4% A good rise!!?!?!? Didnt you notice RPI is up at 4.7% at the moment? Try 7% and we would be talking a good rise. Anything less than 5% is a pay cut... and bearing in mind rates have just been cut you can expect RPI to climb significantly above this value as well!

[musclemech]

There are also a number of petitions about MPs' pay on the No10 Petition site, this looks the most appropriate:
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/MPpayrises/
Quote:
We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Cap MP`s pay rises and bring them inline with the REST of the public sector.
It's amazing that there are only 39 names on this petition.....

[Magnersdrinker]

I think we should top whinging and just get on with the job,crikes we work hard and are proud what we do , why should we get more money ?

people that sell the big issue have no problems on there earnings and id rather be tucked up in a nice little line building than an alley way smelling of wee selling a paper thats just complete mince !!!!

[spanners123]

Magners,
Priceless!

[Yashin]

"alley way smelling of wee "

So that is what happened to all of those guys who served with 42 Sqn down at St Mawgan!

[Melchett01]

I think we should top whinging and just get on with the job,crikes we work hard and are proud what we do , why should we get more money ?

people that sell the big issue have no problems on there earnings and id rather be tucked up in a nice little line building than an alley way smelling of wee selling a paper thats just complete mince !!!!

Magners,

All I can say is I hope you had a few before you wrote that. How about being stuck in an alleyway in Musa Qala or Sangin smelling of death and no paper? Still think we should just crack on for peanuts?

The raw figures may look ok, but you try finding any civilian or god forbid a civil servant or a politician that would go out and do what we do day in day out for the same money ...... oh funny that, you won't.

But then again, maybe you're part of the non-deployable RAF, in which case perhaps you should crawl back to your nice line building and take your money and decide what to spend it on whilst the rest of military get on with the fighting.

There are precious few benefits left to being in the military, pay is about all we have left. But if you don't realise your own worth, why the hell should the politicians recognise it in the form of a half decent pay rise for once!

[lastmanstanding]

Sure youll be ok exRAFAC.
Officers flying pay coming your way next month is it not :E. A nice little £13 or up to £35 a day :ok:

[EdSet100]

Magners,
Nice one centurion.

Melchett,
I can't believe you fell for that.

[45 before POL]

I would hope the government is not foolish enough to give a poor settlement in next years pay rise(although when did common sense come into it). With all the commitments and all 3 forces stretched more than ever, retention of staff problems and recruiting issues, not to mention a forthcoming election:E
i see a bit of light on this issue:}

[general loony]

Heard the AFPRB last year reported that the level of pay which is creamed off for the pension should be reduced by 3% so perhaps if this was actioned with a decent pay rise on top we could be in for a good deal but I doubt it!!!!!!!!!

In anticipation of next years pay award I have PVRed

[blogger]

17% pay rise can be funded for free how!

Well the RAF was 48000 last year now its going to be 41000 a cut of 7000 staff.

Say average wage across all ranks £35k. So there is a saving of (£35K * 7000) = £245 million pounds in wages for the year.

£245M / the remaining 41000 staff thats £5976 each.

£5976/£35K = 17% pay rise

So simple even Gordon knows that giving you a rise of 4% he's saved a packet.

I say you because I have handed in my F1250 and have a nice fat bank balance thanks to 26 years in.

Pay rise indeed............ gimmy more :ok:

[Magnersdrinker]

LOL Edset100

I cant believe there was a bite too lol

Just for info Melchett ive done quite a few OOA,lets just say last 14 months ive done 140 days in the sandpit.

Im not looking for a fight old bean , just a bit of light hearted banter.
Pay rise would be nice and i think we deserve one but reality is we are not going to get what we want. We never do

[Sospan]

I thought I would drop this little gem in here for you all to discuss.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=YOBPD3N4KLYDNQFIQMGSFGGAVCBQWIV0?xml=/news/2008/01/05/narmy105.xml

[spanners123]

If it's true and I hope it is, then that has got to be good news!:ok:

[LFFC]

This sounds like a good opportunity for the government to allow a large increase in remuneration for Service personnel without busting the Treasury's guidelines for public sector pay rises. They would be very foolish not to embrace the AFPRB's recommendation in full!

But what are they going to do about the "pinch points" that are causing concern? I know it's not just an aircrew thing, but from the operators' perspective, experienced pilots seem to be leaving in droves; it's the loss of experienced QFIs, authorizers and execs - that we cannot just wave a magic wand and quickly replace - that hurt most. With companies like Netjets offering early captaincy for experienced personnel, it strikes me that the AFPRB have to do something to stem the outflow!

[D-IFF_ident]

A little bird told me that the Government was hoping to use the review of the X-Factor this year to abolish it. There are personnel within PMA who, I hear, expect the 13% we currently get to be reduced to zero - the reasons being that it does not reflect conditions in the way it was supposed to when it was brought in.

Didn't we get a 'significant' pay rise last year? I am now an average of about 100 quid a month worse off after changes to allowances snuck-in with JPA, a major LOA review and quartering charges increasing to a greater percentage than the pay rise itself.

:ugh:

[brit bus driver]

Not to mention HTD (or whatever it's called today) being cut at a time when fuel prices are rocketing. Nice one that.

The only consolation is that a pay rise, big or small, will only affect my pension.

[Never Alert]

LFFC,

as you say, it's not just aircrew that are walking. Take a look at the figures for some of the other branches and trades, many of them are hurting and it's a problem that money alone, in terms of a pay rise, will not solve.

Accomodation is appalling on many of our camps, it must be sorted. DHE are sitting on their arses, because they can. Nobody seems to be kicking them into gear.

Food at many camps, particularly at some JR messes that use PAYD is, quite frankly, awful. Easy to sort, revert back to plan A & get some blue shirts in the kitchen.

Are incentives likely to be offered outside of the aircrew world?

ATC & FC are likely to take a hit next summer with NATS debating on whether or not to run 'short' courses for ex mil controllers in order to address a huge shortfall in the civil sector. I visited Swanwick recently and NATS are certainly looking at it.

No disrespect to Adminers or other branches that have a fairly short & cheap training system however, they can be replaced as they leave without too much expense. Lets face it, there are plenty of them who started their careers as wannabe pilots, Navs, FC etc and were chopped, sent back to OASC and reselected. Not suggesting they aren't valuable personnel, they just cost a great deal less to train than many other branches/trades.

Incentives may have to be offered to some none aircrew branches & trades in the near future if the potential outflow is to be prevented.

Well, those of us who are not members of the winged master race can always dream...

[Melchett01]

"No disrespect to Adminers or other branches that have a fairly short & cheap training system however, they can be replaced as they leave without too much expense. Lets face it, there are plenty of them who started their careers as wannabe pilots, Navs, FC etc and were chopped, sent back to OASC and reselected. Not suggesting they aren't valuable personnel, they just cost a great deal less to train than many other branches/trades"

Oooooh talk like that will get you direct admission to the Gordon Brown school of economics - price of everything, value of nothing - and I'm sure you wouldn't want that would you???

It's not all about cost, experience is a very valuable commodity; why do you think people leaving the Services in their 20-30s can command higher pay packets than someone fresh in from school / university? Experience, especially when we are engaged in un predictable assymetric ops (and that's just dealing with Brown et al, let alone the various shades of insurgent) is something you can't replace overnight, no matter how short or cheap the training is.

I have been in and out of various bits of the different sandpits since 2003, and a prime example of this can be seen in the various Int staffs I have dealt with - used as an example as engineers aside, they are the ground branch I have had most dealings with on ops. All very keen, and generally very able, but who would you want doing your mission briefings? Someone that's been around and seen a bit and isn't going to panic at the first sign of things not going to plan (lets face it, it rarely does!) or someone fresh out of the Int factory who is keen but still bears a striking resemblance to a rabbit caught in the headlights for the first 2months?

Just a singular example, and I'm sure there are other equally applicable examples for the other various branches. But it serves to make the point that we can't afford to let people walk over sh1t conditions just because they're easy to replace - whatever branch or trade they come from. The experience of those that have been around a bit is the one thing that could keep you alive when it's all going horribly wrong. The only time having an inflow of inexperienced people works is if you're going for a Stalinist policy of quantity over quality, in which case you need a lot of them - something we don't have.

As an afterthought .... just what would people consider to be a decent pay rise? And I mean being realistic and not asking for things that we know will never be forthcoming. And more importantly, if what D-IFF said about X-Factor is correct, what are the odds on X Factor being abolished but take home pay remaining the same ..... by my understanding that would be a 13% rise on the basic salary. Now just think how Brown % Browne could spin that one!!!

[Megawart]

I think that the methodology used in determining the X-Factor results in us being short changed.
For example, when I was in Iraq I came into contact with a mulititude of civilian contractors - from builders and joiners to doctors and nurses.
Universally and without exeption, each were being paid at least TWICE what they would get in the UK for their services. Many volunteered to stay in theatre a little longer to allow them to avoid UK tax for the whole year. The net result was that (for example) a civilian nurse who worked in Basrah Air Station would earn around 4 times their UK take home pay for the year.
For bodyguards, convoy commanders and the like, £100,000 tax free for the year would not be uncommon. AND they have the right to refuse work, complain about pay and conditions, form trade unions and leave when it suits them!
Comparable pay my arse!
Trash

[StopStart]

I agree that some wages for civvies in theatre are huge but "civvies" is the key word here. We've all signed up to work for HMG and as such have to do as we're told. For a civilian company to attract people into a crap job they have to offer the big bucks. Basic economics really. Comparing your salary with the bloke that fixes the internet at the COB is comparing chalk with cheese. If he can earm more than you fitting broadband for BT in Slough then there's going to need to be a fairly big inducement to get him out to Iraq.

Offering service personnel tax free pay whilst on ops overseas would, I reckon, cure so many of our woes in one fail swoop. Money doesn't cure everything but it's a bloody good analgesic....

Unfortuately the Treasury would never, ever, wear it. As such we shall go on haemorrhaging that one intangible, uncostable, invaluable asset we have left: experience. From the aircrew perspective, you only have to read the monthly Flight Safety reports from the overdeployed, undertrained stations to see what this is really costing us.

As for aircrew retention bonuses - well that would be nice. I'm not sure who they're paying these things to but it ain't me and my lot...

[Never Alert]

Melchett01,

My whole point is about maintaining experience in areas other than aircrew. There have been no incentives in the ground branches.

Int is not one of the branches I would refer to as being cheap to train.

My point is that so far, experience has been allowed to walk without so much as a murmour with the exception of aircrew. Int is actually another good example of a branch that would benefit from some sort of incentive, in order to maintain valuable experience.

I have to disagree with you about it not all coming down to money, this thread is based on our potential pay rise. It absolutely does come down to money and the government's failure to cough up is causing us to lose a massive amount of experience to the outside world.

Browne and Brown cannot expect people to hang around due a sense of loyalty to the Service, utter tosh. Loyalty and trust are both supposed to be two way streets.

[minigundiplomat]

The sad thing is, there was a thread similar to this several months ago, and pay and fri's were often mentioned.

Why is this sad?

Because it seems we have passed the tipping point, and now even a big pay increase(which I don't think we will get whilst the plod are being capped due to 'inflation' worries) will not be enough to keep people in. Too little, and far too late.

CAS/CDS/CGS/First Sea Lord - Shame on you for allowing things to get this far!

[Never Alert]

Not enough experience from my point of view, I think NATS would just laugh at me!

I'm not just looking at myself, not at all. It's becoming bloody disturbing to watch so many friends leave the RAF without ANY regrets. The FC branch only one of many branches hurting & it really is starting to grit my sh*t that nothing is going to be done about this at all.

I care about the RAF and it is sad to see that we are becoming a second rate force with no real future. Not under Brown & co anyway.

Rant off!

[minigundiplomat]

I'm afraid that anyone with expectatations of a pay rise in exceedence of last years rise should steel themselves for disappointment.

The public may have sympathy with our cause, but the credit crunch, maortgage rises etc all provide them with their own problems.

Broon has got away with it in the past, he will get away with it until the next election.

Until our manning reaches critical mass, nothing will happen. We may be on our way to critical mass, but we are not there yet. Remember, dilution levels and inexperience don't show up on a balance sheet.

[OHP 15M]

Megawart said,


I think that the methodology used in determining the X-Factor results in us being short changed.



I totally agree. Rhydian was definitely favourite to win the show and media watchdog Ofcom is looking into complaints from X Factor viewers who claim they could not phone in to vote for the eventual runner-up. :ok:

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44301000/jpg/_44301785_rhydian_getty203b.jpg

[D-IFF_ident]

Stoppers - I think the FRIs are only paid to Sqn Ldrs at their 38 point now. Still 50K - but there is good news if you are a Sqn Ldr and at your 38 point - the FRI is DOUBLED to 100K. Because what we really need are crap 40 yr old Sqn Ldrs who couldn't get a job in an airline because all the people they've p155ed off along the way won't recommend them to their employers.

Bunch of @rse mate.

[The Dodger]

I have to second Melchett's last post. I agree that the Air Force flys Aircraft and for that you need Aircrew, who should be well paid as a result of the time it takes to train and to gain experieance.

However other trades do take a long time also to train, and that's not just the techies. The AFPRB has always given retention bonuses to Aircrew to stem the flow of them going but they don't seem to realise that IT'S NOT JUST THEM LEAVING. We are hemorraghing ground trade people at an alarming rate, yet what has been done to sort this? It's too little too late. I know alot of people who have been told that they can make more money outside and they are leaving in droves. Something has to be done in this pay offer to retain other trades, not just the Aircrew.

[LFFC]

Dodger

I think that the wheels are perfectly aware that it's not just aircrew that are leaving, and I agree that something should be done about it.

However, it costs so much more, and takes so much longer, to replace experienced pilots that it makes economic sense to offer financial retention incentives to keep them serving!

To catch an important point that people have made tonight; it's not just pay that counts. As in the civilian world, pay is just part of the overall remuneration package - all sorts of other things count. The Bean Counters recognised that about 5 or 6 years ago when they introduced a range of retention measures, only one of which was financial. The trouble is that, most, if not all, of the non-financial retention measures that I remember being trumpeted from the parapets seem to have been washed away by recent "initiatives" and savings measures.

Here's an interesting snip from the AFPRB's report in 2002:


The results of the Services’ Continuous Attitude Surveys pointed to a series of push and pull factors influencing retention. These included: the effect on family life of separation; promotion opportunities; overstretch; leave and travel warrant restrictions; competition from civilian jobs with skill shortages; and pay in relation to hours worked. MOD acknowledged that no one policy alone could resolve retention issues and that the ability to control some factors was constrained. Retention initiatives now in place included the Service Families Task Force, separation bonuses, Financial Retention Incentives, the Operational Welfare Package and easier transfer between capbadges. It added that other measures were in hand including pay modernisation, a review of compensation and pension schemes, and accommodation improvements.


I'm sure that at least the "pay modernisation" has had quite an impact on retention!

[Door Slider]

Dont think we will be getting much of a rise!!
http://http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7173656.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7173656.stm)

[engineer(retard)]

Stop Start

I think that you are missing a major campaign pedestal by ignoring what convoy commanders et al get paid because they are civvies. My recollection is that the 40% pension increase and over inflation pay rises that MPs vote for them selves is based on equivalence to other people ( in their case foreign MPs) get paid. Sauce for the goose?

regards

retard

[StopStart]

Eng(r)

The snuffling snouts at the trough will use that as a reason to demand their 7000% pay rise every two weeks or whatever is, as they are comparing like with like.

The pay rights of a civilian convoy commander can no more be compared with a military one than can those of a senior BA captain and senior RAF AT captain. By signing up to the military you waive your rights to (among many many other things) to be paid "danger" money etc when sent somewhere nasty or to demand the high salaries of the civilian sector.

Where we can, rightly, bitch and moan however is when we compare our benefits to those of the other militaries alongside which we serve. US Forces getting tax free pay and Australians getting tax free pay plus their other bonuses are prime examples.

D-IFF
I'd heard it was something like that. It's a shame the RAF can't make targetted FRIs to retain the key people that we need to keep rather than this scattergun approach. A shortage of sqn ldrs and we get this blanket FRI that attracts a few good chaps to stay as well as, as you said, all the chisellers that couldn't get a job in civvy street as they've either been blackballed or are just crap.
Genius

[engineer(retard)]

StopStart

I think that we are in agreement about the principle of equivalence. However, in my mind the lower pay argument is much the same as paying an insurance premium for when your roof caves in. If your limit of liability is set too low or you do not keep up your premiums then you may not have enough for the new roof. The peace dividends were taken against a percieved lower risk and that assessment has been proved wrong, so the Treasury should cough up an excess in both pay and resources.

regards

retard

[TOPBUNKER]

I find it interesting that when GB talks of public sector workers he mentions nurses and police and firemen but never Armed Forces personnel.

I wonder why?
Could it be...
1. He's going to exempt them from below inflation pay increases.
2. He doesn't dare mention a real-terms pay cut for them for risk of a public revolt.
3. The Armed Forces are just something he has to tolerate and don't really feature in his thoughts.

Personally I suspect number 2 from the above list. And as ever, with his cowardly approach to bad news announcements, he'll be missing on the day of the announcement which will be made by some REMF junior cabinet minister.

[dallas]

Wouldn't the implication be that he has already pre-judged (or ignored) the recommendations of the AFPRB if he includes us in the list?

[D-IFF_ident]

A bit off-topice, but here is a quote from Health Insurance and Protection magazine (I know, I know) http://www.hi-mag.com/healthinsurance/article.do?articleid=20001637314 :

"Danger zones

Whether a member of the armed forces, a civilian posted to a war zone to carry out support services, or a charity worker in a part of Africa hit by civil war, the risk of death or serious injury is increased dramatically. This can make getting cover extremely problematic.

Indeed, during the Iraq War, the insurance industry came in for a lot of criticism because it turned down applications for life assurance from army personnel. Carr says there is a simple way round this.

“Unless you’re applying from a war zone you’ll be able to get cover in exactly the same way as anyone else,” he explains. “British Forces Post Office addresses are treated as UK addresses so this isn’t a problem.”

Further, even if someone is in the middle of the action they can still get cover, providing they are prepared to pay. Webber has arranged life cover for security guards in Iraq.

“The premium was £800 a month but, given that they receive an income of £5,000 a week, many do take it out,” he says."


So, as my good friend Stoppers suggests, it appears that a CIVVIE security guard can earn £5,000 a week - whereas a Private doing a similar job might expect to take home around £250 (he is, of course, paying tax on his £15677 per year. If he paid insurance sufficient to keep him and his family comfortable after any life-changing incident then he could arguably take home £200 per month - which he would need to buy his own kit. Is it any wonder why our Army personnel are filling the resettlement courses to become qualified as security guards?

[TOPBUNKER]

dallas, I think you are agreeing with number 2 of my propositions.

Upon further consideration I think I should have opted for numbers 2 and 3 btw.

P.S. Which of the military leaders will stand up and be counted if a below inflation pay cut is announced.

[OCCWMF]

It is about the money in part, but the gradual erosion of those 'added extras' which made the forces a pleasant place to be 20 years ago has taken away the gloss from what should be an enjoyable career. We train for war and when we are actually in theatre, doing the job, you would be hard pressed to beat us. We will moan about the conditions but so would anyone. And we stay there and make the most of it.

But why, when we come home, should we have to work our backsides off? During peacetime we should be recharging, repairing and restocking. And not just equipment but people too. Only 41000 of us? Then why are we doing the work of 75000? I'm talking about medical cover for you and your family. Cheap housing, built and maintained to a good standard, fit to house you and your families. Recreation facilities with food and drink that you want to eat and drink, at prices that make it pleasant to be in the military.

You may end up paying a high price for your time in and it would seem fair exchange to feel valued and be able to live a life beyond your means for lending your mortality to society.

Oh, and pay-as-you-dine can f+(£ right off. Short sighted, short changed.:=

[Smudger552]

3 Year pay award anyone?

Smudge:eek:

[D-IFF_ident]

Smudger - I've just been watching the PM's slack jaw on the lunchtime news, accompanied by Capt Darling, so I now know what you're talking about.

The possibilty of public sector workers (including the military) getting 3-year pay reviews vice the current annual ones. I would hope that if this does occur then some sort of forecast of inflation over the coming years would be included in the calculations. I.e. if inflation is forecast to be 3% per year for the coming 3 years then pay must increase by at least 10%, to keep-up. If inflation was 3% and pay increase was also 3% then we would be getting real-term pay cuts for 2 years in a row.

I wouldn't put it past them to review pay every 3 years but review quartering, payd, etc charges annually. :=

[plans123]

Here's the BBC article
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7176170.stm
My favourite bit is:Public sector pay rises are recommended by an independent body and this year suggested 2.5% increases.
But the government decided to award that rise in two stages - so it equates to a 1.9% rise - saying it would tackle higher inflation and keep interest rates and mortgage rates low.


So thats a below inflation pay rise then? Looks like the first step towards the 'Irish payrises' of the 70's again

[Melchett01]

"To send out the best possible message, about long-term inflation and about stability and to be fair to public sector workers, one way forward is a move towards long-term public sector pay settlements.

"It means as people face mortgage bills and utility prices they know exactly what their income is likely to be.


Quite. As we slip into recession and interest rates inevitably start to head back up and financial institutions fend of the effects of a credit crunch by failing to pass on rate cuts, and foreign energy companies (aided and abetted by the Govt's failure to ensure key strategic industries remain in UK hands) will use the UK population as a cash cow and council taxes continue their inexorable upward trend against the trend of public service provision, Gordon's plans will at least mean that people will have transparency.

They will be able to guarantee that for the next 3 years they are likely to have less money and face the possibility of things only getting worse. But at least they will be able to see that coming for the next 3 years ahead. So that must be alright then.:ugh:

[Epimetheus]

When Andrew Marr challenged GB specifically on the Armed Forces on Sunday morning BBC, the reply was that the AFPRB would present its findings later this year. At least this wasn't a blanket one-size-fits-all response on public sector pay.

[Biggus]

Epimetheus - I don't see that your logic follows at all. Saying '.....the AFPRB would present its finding later this year....' just means that is when the Gov will make its decision. It doesn't mean the Gov will agree with the AFPRB, or rule out the Gov going for a three year deal when the AFPRB comes up with its findings. It is just the typical politicians way of avoiding answering the actual question asked!!!

What if the AFPRB says the X-factor should go up by 3%, plus a rise of .......blah, blah, etc. The government might well come up with a 3 year formula that includes 1% extra per year on the X-factor.

[South Bound]

It is my understanding that HMG generally accepts the findings of the AFPRB report with little or no tinkering. It is likely that we will get what they recommend - cue indignation and outspoken support from all the senior retired officers (and a few serving) should GB choose to mess with it.

[Once A Brat]

It is my understanding that HMG generally accepts the findings of the AFPRB report with little or no tinkering. It is likely that we will get what they recommend

I agree Southbound, historically that has been the case but there again that had also been the case for the Police's pay recommendations.........................until this year!!

I don't hold much hope!! Remember, a pessimist is just an experienced optimist!!


Once a brat...always a brat - Trenchards finest

[White Noise]

I don't think it will be much in the basic pay increase but i think they will have to seriously review the X-factor.

[VinRouge]

WN, dream on.... I forsee in my crystal ball 0% pay increase (actual, not inflation adjusted) with the increase in 12-20% of X factor recommended being spread out over 3 years as the pay increase that is sold to the press as "the best thing since sliced bread for defence". Of course, we know differently. Oh, the only other thing is, it will be sold as above what the police, NHS and fire service will be getting given, so we will be b*ggered if we want to whine about it to the press. Queue even BIGGER rush for the doors! :eek:

Me being Cynical? No, just 10 years serving under a Labour government and know exactly how they shove the knife in and give it a little twist to boot as well... BAFF or the other forces thingy that was set up should get onto this, Noo Labour MUST be shown for the shower of Shoite they are before the above is implemented, or else you can bet your bottom dollar we will be getting sub-inflationary pay rises for at least the next three years.... :-(

PS IMHO, I honestly believe we should be using RPI rather than CPI for pay settlements, the latter mainly consists of wide screen TVs and IPODs, plus a raft of other stuff that chav Brittania seems to thrive off, and very very little of the stuff we actually need to eat (or at least not weighted so highly by the ONS). You get very skeptical of these figures when you study these figures when you find out that things going down in price (consumer electronics mainly) are given a far higher weighting than stuff going up, such as oil, food, power and other household essentials. Do you know that the ONS actually INCREASED the weighting of gas in the CPI only as it started going down in value? Scandellous. Of course, we (the public sector) will all have to pay the price for Gordys ten years of wanton excess and spending to ensure that our deficit doesnt go any higher (it will) as a result of decreasing tax revenues and a potential recession. I would have much preferred IRs to have been increased significantly back in 2003 instead of saving the pain for now, but hey hum we have an independent Bank of England right? :}

[Melchett01]

This thread is also running over on Arrse. Perusing the thread, came across this gem from ' Skynet' which expresses the situation very powerfully and eloquently, especially wit regard to MPs pay - and bear in mind that the MPs pay review board have this afternoon also just recommended an above inflation rise of 2.8% for MPs wiith bigger rises to come in the next few years.

There are about 600 odd MPs which is about the size of an average infantry Bn. I wonder how much pay they would ask for if every 18 months or so 9 were killed and about 50 wounded

Skynet's point has made a big impact on Arrse members, several of whom are looking at running with it amongst their own contacts. Wouldn't it be a shame if PPruners happened to use their external contacts to pass on a very good point.

[Biggus]

First of all I am not saying that MPs deserve it, but 2.8% is not 'an above inflation rise' - at least not as far as I am concerned. Inflation is the RPI figure as I see it, and is currently about 4.3%!!

Interestingly enough the rest of the MPs pay review included an RPI, YES RPI, I SAY AGAIN RPI, increase for the next two years, along with an extra £650 each year, so about RPI + 1%!!!

So, in summary, for MPs the recommendation is.

Year 1 = 2.8%
Year 2 = RPI + £650
Year 3 = RPI + £650

NICE!! I expect they will vote in favour!

[VinRouge]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=507086&in_page_id=1770

Oh dear, it appears pole dancers are on a similar pay scheme to us... :}

[L J R]

Looking at the picture Vin, I know who I'd prefer to talk to..

[VinRouge]

Only at the weekend :E