Return of service

[onthebumline]

A friend of mine joined her service (UK) under the terms that they would have to serve for a minimum of 5 years on completion of relevant flying training courses. While she was on the OCU completing the advanced phase of flying training on the type that she would eventually fly on the front line, she was told by her course officer that she HAD (i.e. was obliged by the service) to sign a form commiting to a change in the Return of Service (RoS) from five years to six years. As a pure matter of interest, does anyone have any thoughts or opinions on the legality of this move. She feels, in hindsight, that it was a rather sneaky move considering the system induced pressure of flying training......lets face it, it would take a fairly brassy student to turn round to thier flight commander/course officer and refuse to sign such a thing.

Any ideas????????

[Miles Magister]

I think it was a terrible management move to solve a short term manning problem. It is my opinion that it would not stand up in court, but you might have to take it to court to get your benefits if you left after 5 years.

Another of this government's loyalty to its armed forces.

[minigundiplomat]

She should count herself lucky she is not NCA at Odiham, where submitting a leave pass these days carries a 12 year ROS.

[Aerouk]

A contract between an employee and a employer is created on mutual agreement, so if the employee refuses to change the agreement then the employer can just terminate the contract with the required notice.

Whether this is the case for military, I have no idea.

[Mungo5]

A contract between an employee and a employer is created on mutual agreement, so if the employee refuses to change the agreement then the employer can just terminate the contract with the required notice.

It is also illegal to 'force' someone into a contract or alterations to a contract - unless of course the change is referenced in the original contract. A consultation period should be offered at very least.*

An employment agreement, military or otherwise is still a contract.

*not legal advice, just the basics of contracts.

[Op_Twenty]

I think a similar approach was tried at Valley a year ago with students being told they all had to sign a piece of paper agreeing to stay in the Service if they were chopped from flying. They were told that they were already bound by their joining terms anyway but they had to sign to say they understood those terms; failure to sign would mean removal from flying training. Seeing as those terms were not presented to the students and they soon realised that the CO (of one particular Sqn) would be unable to remove them all, the students refused to sign. It all went quiet after that.

Personally I would challenge that order, request proof/documents etc and finally go and talk to a certain civilian lawyer who will give you free advice and is not too fond of the way the Services feel they can strong arm their personnel. If you need a name, PM me. You are the best asset the Service has, don't let them tell treat you otherwise.

[PPRuNeUser0211]

The MOD has always had a very liberal interpretation of employment law. Look at the flying pay scuffle recently: Studes sign up to terms of service (FP 72 weeks into trg). MOD decide to change rules, backdate by some years and deny studes flying pay. (Good or bad, the snag was more the way they back-dated it, not the decision itself!)

[3engnever]

Hold On! As I believe it, a 6 year return of service on completion of a front line OCU has been a pre requisite to the starting of said course for some time. Said individual should not have been able to start the OCU without signing up to the RoS. In fact, I beleive by just turning up to and partaking in the OCU is seen to be in agreement to said RoS.

Unfortunately, for your friend, the MOD spends a huge amount of money training aircrew. If any of these individuals where to join a similar set up within civvie street I am sure the associated bonds would be of similar penance!

[Aerouk]

Mungo5,

Of course being forced into a contract voids the contract, but no one is being forced into it. If she doesn't want to go ahead with the agreement then the agreement can be cut.

[Pure Pursuit]

Absolute nonesense to suggest that simply turning up for an OCU ties you into a ROS.

You have to be offered the chance to sign it prior to starting training. If you refuse to sign it, training can still commence if it is judged that you are unlikely to leave anytime soon.

I know of one FC who PVRd before his ROS was up and, after mentioning a solicitor, walked away into civvy street.

Bottom line is that the AP that holds reference to ROS does not stand up under civil law. Instead, the powers that be in the ivory towers rely on personnel being intimidated into 'honouring' the agreement.

[Airborne Aircrew]

When I remustered to NCO Aircrew I had to sign a 22 year agreement after I had completed 4 years of a 9 year engagement so an additional year is hardly shocking.

[Diablo Rouge]

I heard of this happening about 2 years ago within the rotary world at DHFS. Nobody signed IIRC and it was quietly pushed under the carpet. For it to reappear now, albeit single service is either someone having a laugh or the MoD lawyers have given it the tick in the box. I agree that to lean on a 'student' this way is unfair and very close to bullying.

Of course Deepcut set the MoD precedent on bullying, and this one pales into insignificance by comparision.

[Diablo Rouge]

Airman Aircrew said:

When I remustered to NCO Aircrew I had to sign a 22 year agreement after I had completed 4 years of a 9 year engagement so an additional year is hardly shocking.

When what you mean is: Terms and Conditions for airmen remustering into SNCO Aircrew are that they must accept a 22 year engagement. You didnt 'have to' do anything; you chose to be a sky god.

This you knew even before you applied for the job or attended OASC. It was not imposed on you halfway through your training system. Traditionally, the expected return of service for flying training has been one complete tour. Unless things have changed, a standard tour length does not last 6 years. I have recently had 2 years quoted post OCU. (Not ab-initio)

[Airborne Aircrew]

Diablo:

Absolutely... and I wasn't complaining... simply stating that to go to from any trade and any engagement to NCA one was expected to add a significant amount of time to one's engagement. That amount of time was largely ROS as it was explained to me. The addition of a year doesn't seem that great to me but I will agree with you entirely that "leaning" on students is a "dirty trick"...

[The Oberon]

A bit off thread but in 1961 I remember being herded into the Apprentice NAAFFI at Locking along with 150 other spotty youths and being presented with a mountain of paperwork. I queried one of the forms and was told by a discip Flt. Sgt. " If you don't sign that, you don't get paid !!!"

What had I signed ? 22 years subs to the RAFBF.

[whowhenwhy]

MGD I'm amazed that you were allowed to find a leave pass or gain access to JPA to submit one. Things have obviously changed at Odious recently....

[Talk Reaction]

IIRC one service simply came in line with the others that have always had 6 years RoS for initial fg trg and OCU. To be fair to the original point, you'd have to question someone's intentions if a change from 5 to 6 years was received in such a way (not that I'm backing up the official line you understand), for goodness sake, no-one tell your 'friend' that they may be spending more time away from home than planned in out of date equipment!

Re contracts - has anyone here actually signed a contract???

Final thought, if it just sucks then resign and wlak away with 30 days notice - I can't see the RAF taking you to court casue you dont want to do a job anymore (even a cheap lawyer can say ' human rights').

[3engnever]

If you want to go hard ball then a PVR doesn't count for anything. Legally, if you wish to leave you can do so at any point with one months notice as this is the period by which you are paid. Take this to the courts and you will get it through almost certainly so what is the point of all this thread!! If you have been told and given the chance to sign the ROS and choose not to then you should at this point resign from flying training. The RAF sees continuing with your OCU as agreeing to the ROS irregardless of a signature on an ROS form.

[High_Expect]

I guess some units do and some don’t…. I never signed the form but then again I’ve completed the return of service anyway.

I wish I could make them sign something saying that they’ll show me the same kind of commitment to keeping me flying….. (thinking about FJ postings in the next 24months)…….. interesting times ahead…. :ugh:

[Top Bunk Tester]

I remember in early 1990, having been started NCO Aircrew training on the TOS that I would pass out acting Sgt and become substansive at the end of OCU and then be on merit promotion for the rest of my career, several of us retreads were called to Handbrake House to be told "It's up to you but the've looked at the TOS again and if you really want to, because you were SELECTED for training prior to Oct 1st 1989 (I was at BH in late Sept) you can go onto the old TOS, pass out substansive Sgt and get reserved rights pay on time from then on but actual promotion on merit"

We all looked at each other, thought long and hard (about a nanosecond) and all started smirking and reaching for a pen. Passed out a couple of months later Subs Sgt, paid FS. Left the mob still as a Sgt but paid as a Master and pensioned as such.

Unfair? Yes Complaining? No....ah the good old days:D

[Pontius Navigator]

Through the years there have been numerous cases of 'sign' or else.

In 1963 it was have a 'flu jab or lose your flying pay if you go down with 'flu.

In 1973, sign this 'voluntary' press waiver or you won't go on the trip.

In 1982, sign this 'voluntary' waiver to accept annual blood tests or you will lose your aircrew category, and so on and so on.

I guess not one was a legal order.

It is also convievable that the various fitness tests introduced from the 70s were also of dubious legality.

[Duncan D'Sorderlee]

Folks,

There has - for the last few years anyway - been a 6 year RoS, covered by a DIN and AP3392. Those who were unaware of that were, like me, probably grabbing a well deserved nap in Whittle Hall when it was promulgated. The form that was sent to Trg units ( which was poorly handled by some) was an attempt to remind those going through FT of their obligation and occurred after a couple of VWs were poorly handled on an OCU. There was nothing underhand intended; it was a reminder that if you VW prior to getting your brevet/flying badge the system has you for 3 years from getting your badge; if you are CR, they have you for 6 years from the end of the OCU.

Duncs:ok:

[Diablo Rouge]

But what is the score for subsequent OCU & ROS after for example:

Change of ac type beyond the following.........

a) 22 years service. (12 months PVR or 18 months NGR)
b) 30 years service & therefore a right to give 6 months notice PVR.
c) Age 50 -"-
d) Age 55 and therefore immediate resettlement leave on a bad day.

The reason I ask is because I know of someone who is not happy about being told 3 years ROS post OCU despite having a & b & c already squared away. 50+ and a new role & ac type, "gutsy move!" ...& not through choice.

[I'm Off!]

ROS rules at the moment are so grey and badly written between TGOs and ASIs - there is clear evidence of them contradicting each other. Whoever wrote them was a chimp, they need re-writing and doing properly this time, and any decent lawyer would drive a bus through this case quoted.

If the person concerned could be bothered to fight the case, which may take a while!!