Service Personnel Command Paper

[SirToppamHat]

Originally posted on the Military Covenant Thread, but I thought this might be worthy of its own...

Has anyone seen this Paper out today?

I had a link sent to me at work as I had participated in the information gathering for it. It's pretty relevant to this thread - it effectively sets out what the Gov't plans to do to improve things for the military. It includes things like dental and schooling arrangements for families and also proposals to change the existing housing policies both within and without the MoD.

Link found here to news on the Army Web:

Army Web News Item. (http://www.army.mod.uk/4279.aspx)

and here's a link to the Paper itself (WARNING 4.9mb pdf download):

Service Personnel Command Paper. (http://www.army.mod.uk/documents/general/Command_Paper.pdf)

I can't see there will be any genuinely new money though ... PR09 anyone?

STH

[RAF_SARGE]

Thanks for the link but although there are a number of reasonable measures in there it stops short of what we really want. An increase in X-factor and a large, above inflation, pay rise, say 8% minimum. Sadly I don't see that being forthcoming?

[dallas]

Thanks for the link but although there are a number of reasonable measures in there it stops short of what we really want. An increase in X-factor and a large, above inflation, pay rise, say 8% minimum. Sadly I don't see that being forthcoming?
I think X-factor is a much under used stick/carrot. Although intended to compensate for the 'exigencies of Service life', it still seems that those who cannot/do not commit to these exigencies, continue to receive it. Until this 15-ish% of our wages is used in a more intelligent way - as a bonus for maintaining readiness and a penalty to those who cannot do so (with the knock-on incentive to return to the deployable fold asap) - it might as well not exist. Notwithstanding those who are genuinely ill/injured, there are still those who will find any way they can to get out of their less palatable service commitments, and I think the lack of any sort of penalty just makes this more prevalent.

As for 8% pay rise, I actually disagree. No matter what the pay level, people will always adjust to spending it, so it's a short term measure that won't necessarily do much good. Better to target those who fulfil their commitments with different bonuses than apply a broad brush. And yes, that might create a 'them and us' - so what - it exists when it comes to stuff like deployments, guard etc.

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

I agree that taking the X factor away from the lard arses makes sense but how would you go on to define someones deployability. More importantly why should someone be denied the extra that you would award those who deploy simply because he/she is posted to a type that is currently not in theatre.......................big can of worms me thinks.

Take X factor away from lard arses, see how suddenly people rush to become "fit" again.

Pay X factor to all who are fit and keep/improve the current Op allowance package.

Not rocket science but it will never ever happen :ugh:

[dallas]

I think the key word is capability. Everyone who is capable of being deployed receives X Factor, even if they might be screened or otherwise in the wrong place. Those who are incapable, who benefit from being able to live a relatively normal life where they can make plans in excess of 6 months, do not receive the X Factor while they remain undeployable because it is compensation for maintaining readiness.

The underlying point is X Factor could be used as a direct incentive for people to fulfil the military role that they signed-up for, where there is currently no incentive, and in actual fact many disincentives.

I think we all know people who can't deploy anywhere because they're medically downgraded, who can seemingly manage physical activity on their own terms - and often stuff more demanding than anything they would encounter at our less dangerous deployment locations (Qatar, FI etc). It's time to counter human nature with human nature - playing the game = extra cash; not doing so = out of pocket.

[Whenurhappy]

Let's get back to basics. Remember the Herzberg Two-Factor Theorem of Management? Satisfiers vs Hygeine factors? Money isn't a motivator, but lack of it is a de-motivator. In a recent interviews of over 250 serving personnel (from SAC to Sqn Ldr, accross all branches and trades) not one person mentioned pay as a source of concern. Several did compare with what they could earn on an oil rig, but, again, not dissatisfied with their lot. Similarly, apart from one specific area, housing wasn't raised as a problem. Now JPA...well, the response was predictable!

If we make X factor post specific, that would be equally divisiove, and a valid concern could be:'I'm not in receipt of X factor, therefore I am not deployable' ie like FTRS and MPGS.

The key is to keep people valued by providing them variety and make the time between deployments profitable time (in every sense, family, professional, developmental etc)

NZWP

[Roland Pulfrew]

Wader

I have no problem with what you suggest as long as those who are fit to deploy but aren't by virtue of their job at a particular moment do not lose out. Instructors, those on types that aren't involved in ops (this time), some of those in MOD or procurement to name a few.

Turn it around and ask why those on the 4 months out 16 months home (joke) roster should NOT get extra.

But then again, you could argue that they do. LSSA. Op Allowance. Reduction in council tax (How I laughed) etc etc.

[Roguedent]

If its the X-Factor (more money) that you are looking for then leave and go get it yourself in civvie street. Don't whinge that so and so is getting more than me, so and so can't deploy. Money is not the over riding factor in the arguement. Quality of life i.e. more time not on ops etc, is. :}

The government of the day was voted in by us, and we have to put up with what our masters deem right for us. We can't have our cake and eat it. :mad:

For the people who can't deploy, well that's for his/her peers and managers to stop being all PR and HR sensitive and tell them to get their fat lazy a$$ round the confidence course or go on a diet. The medical down grades have a different role, as they may have been injured on ops, but if not,again the PTI's have to step up to get these people fit and if that means putting noses out of joint then so be it. We're in the MILITARY FFS!!!! we need to start acting like it and not a bunch of civil servants who want to strike every time something happens they don't like:mad:

A point on the civil servents bonus....it takes a document of around 6 pages to even qualify for a bonus and then there are strict guide lines for the line managers. It took a colleage of mine 2 months to fully complete. So to add this to OJARs, F6000, JPA etc...we'd be at the desk all the time...in fact...no ops at all...i've solved it!!!:D:D

[VinRouge]

What is someone injures themselves training for the fitness test then? To my knowledge, I have not heard anyone refusing to be deployed becuae they had failed their fitness test. So, if they still deploy, should they have their pay docked?

Would you remove X-factor for this?

I think the paper is a welcome start. Getting cross-department support is something that should have been though of years ago.

It is a start however, the true benefits are yet to be seen, with many programmes not yeilding till past 2010, IE when Labour will get booted out.

It is incumbent on any government in power to insure their armed forces are well looked after; this paper is the first step.

[BEagle]

The X-factor is intended to compensate for a well-defined number of issues.

Deployment to high-risk areas is an entirely different issue - and one which should be compensated in a different manner. Such as 100% income tax relief for every month, or part thereof, spent out of area.

Equality of pay has always been a thorny problem. Why, for example, should some aircrew person who worked his ar$e off receive the same pay as his colleague who just turned up, flew, and went home again?

[5 Forward 6 Back]

Agree with BEagle. Why has everyone decided that only deployability should be rewarded with the x factor?

From the Army website:

The X-Factor compensates for such things as, for example, being subject to military discipline, liability for duty at all times, the inability to resign at will, change jobs or negotiate pay, and the danger, turbulence and separation which are part of Service life. The X-Factor also considers some of the advantages of being in the Army, such as travel, adventure, the chance to learn a trade, variety, leave and job security.

Deployability only seems to come under the "danger" and "separation" elements. Even the non-OOA capable lard asses are subject to military discipline, can't resign at will, change jobs, negotiate pay, and are subject to turbulence and separartion.

The particular issues regarding deployment should be compensated over and above the x factor; so rather than punishing those that don't, reward those that do.

[Whenurhappy]

From the Command Paper:

Roll-out of Community Mental Health
following Pilots. Mental health services
do not always fully address the needs
of veterans. We are establishing pilot
schemes to provide community mental
health services for veterans in 6 locations
across Great Britain.

We need to be told....

[fergineer]

and further to your why should same aircrew person get paid the same why do pilots get more flying pay than NCO aircrew........dons helmet and flak jacket and hope that I am far enough away to avoid most of the flak...

[Epimetheus]

Wader2,

Apols if I misunderstood your earlier post, but interesting that you differentiated between "rank and file" and wg cdrs when talking of the rut of OOA. There are officers at this rank and above picking up further NFU OOA dets while fit colleagues remain in their posts without having been OOA. Is there no roster? Apparently not. The ACOS Manning line is - the timeline fits, so off you go (you could create a debate here about who controls the timelines but it's inconsequential). These officers are not untouched by OOA, and this is one reason why AFPRB in 2007 saw fit to reinstate full or higher levels of X-Factor for wg cdr/gp capt/air cdre ranks. Most of them were unaware that they were getting 13% ....... to ..... 0% of X-Factor from level 5 wg cdr up to AVM rank, until the AFPRB observed that this was not a fair reflection of OOA effort and civilian pay comparability, amongst other factors.

Aside, BBC NEWS | Politics | Military staff shortages warning (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7532008.stm) the BBC reports the Defence Select Committee has concerns over military staff shortages set against retention targets.

More departures meant "increased pressure on those who remain", said committee chairman James Arbuthnot

Mr Arbuthnot said: "The MoD must take action to address this vicious circle before it becomes irreversible

But we'll be OK because:

Defence Minister Derek Twigg said that recruitment was up on a year earlier

[Wader2]

Epimethus,

I did not mean to exclude wg cdrs from the deployment pool argument and may be gp capt too but I suspect that the number of gp capt in the deployment pool is far fewer, certainly in the 4-16 or 8-24 months rotation.

Nor was I trying to create a definitive division. Since the thread started the Civil Service magazine has come out, may I quote on bonuses:

"the system does nothing to motivate"

"devalues"

"a lottery"

"admit it's silly and give it up as a bad job"

I concede that to manage the X-factor as an incentive to become deployable would propably be counter productive, difficult to manage, and divisive.

[Talk Reaction]

This is frightening short-sightedness!! X-factor is not there to ofset the current exigensies (sp?) of military life, it's to do with moving around every 2-3 years. The possibilities of short notice changes and the effects on families too, and a whole host of other things that make military life less 'easy' than civilian life, thats why it's been around for a very long time. What you're all discussing now, about a lot of hard and dangerous work being done by most does need rewarding in an intelligent way (back to tax free tours...) Specifically, x-factor caters for the general inconvenience of mil life and EVERYONE in a uniform deserves it. Even those we persieve (sp?)to avoid the real graft.
To suggest that some dont deserve it also suggests that we feel x factor is suitable recompense for OOA way in excess of harmony.... I don't think it is and we shouldn't open ourselves up to inappropriate government solutions. Rant over, X-factor for all for life in military, tax free pay, and better welfare than HMP for those deploying all the time.

[dallas]

Rant over, X-factor for all for life in military, tax free pay, and better welfare than HMP for those deploying all the time.
Fair point about X Factor, but to spin this around, what do you propose we do about lead swingers - and they're certainly out there - who pick and choose which bits of being in the military they want to do?