Redundancy Tranche 2 delayed.

[sidewayspeak]

Great. They're pissing us around again. When you read this in conjunction with the People Campaign Plan (our personnel are our most valued asset), it makes you realise just how full of s**t the Air Ranks are.

IF YOU'RE READING THIS AIR FARCE COMMAND, DO THE HONOURABLE THING AND LET PEOPLE KNOW WTF IS GOING ON SO WE CAN GET ON WITH OUR LIVES. :mad:


DIB 20110802

Notification of selection for redundancy in Tranche 1 of the Armed Forces Redundancy Programme will take place, as planned on 1 September 2011 for Army and RAF, and 30 September 2011 for the Royal Navy.

• Announcement of fields, and opening of the window for applications from those in the fields for Tranche 2, will be delayed to early 2012.

• All other Redundancy Programme policies remain in force.

DETAIL:
1. Notification of those selected in Tranche 1 of the Armed Forces Redundancy Programme will take place on 1 Sep 11 for Army and RAF and 30 Sep 11 for RN, as previously announced.
2. Announcement of those fields making up Tranche 2 of the programme is being delayed to ensure the broader impact of Defence Transformation is taken into account so that the right decisions can be made on the future balance of skills and experience across the forces.
3. Announcement of tranche 2 fields will take place in early 2012, and subsequent tranches are also likely to be delayed from the previously planned dates.
4. We realise the Redundancy Programme causes great uncertainty for all our Service personnel and we will confirm the date or dates for tranche 2 announcements as soon as we can.
5. There will be no change to the length of the period of notice for individuals selected for redundancy – 6 months from notification for applicants and 12 months for non-applicants.
6. The delays will also help us to absorb a change in accounting policy.
7. All tranches are still planned to be completed by the end of 2015.

[Maxibon]

As far as I understand with both mil redundancies and VERS having been considerably more popular than anticipated, there is a lack of cash in the pot to meet the redundancy payments.:D

[Hueymeister]

:mad::ugh:YOU COULDN'T MAKE THIS FARCE UP..................COULD YOU?:mad::ugh::}

[Grabbers]

You really couldn't make this up. :ugh::ugh:

After every lunatic decision I think I've seen it all. Then they go and trump it a little further down the line. What odds on keeping RAF Lyneham airfield open as a hub for the inbound schools. Perhaps they'll use the studes for 2nd and 3rd line servicing on the remaining aircraft types. Get their instructors to sign-off the work and Robert is your Mothers Brother.

[Yozzer]

IF YOU'RE READING THIS AIR FARCE COMMAND, DO THE HONOURABLE THING AND LET PEOPLE KNOW WTF IS GOING ON SO WE CAN GET ON WITH OUR LIVES.

or could it be............

We at Manning read PPrune and are aware that a 'lot' of people are sufficiently hacked off to pull the yellow and black. The rumours are backed up by facts :{ Therefore we are going to watch and shoot: Wait Out!

[MG]

Wait 6 months, let people PVR instead of wait for redundancy and you've saved yourself £40k in extra pay-out and the cost of flying pay per person. Good economics, it would seem.

[RumPunch]

And the most laughable thing is the recruitment adverts have started up on TV, we are getting rid of potentially 7000 fully trained experienced personnel only to replace them with 7000 non trained personnel :ugh::ugh:Most of which will require at least 5 years to become competent in whatever trade they may be.

[high spirits]

What is the quoted 'change in accounting policy'?

[Willard Whyte]

Not only could I make it up, I could predict it.

But then, I don't walk around with my head up my arse.

[MrBernoulli]

Could it be that the more people who PVR, the longer it might take for any 2nd tranche to be decided? After all, if personnel numbers decline due to PVRs, there is no need for much of a 2nd tranche of redundancies. And as others have pointed out, PVRs seem to cost a lot less than redundancies. :D

MoD? Ministry of Dickheads .............

[Farfrompuken]

I'm guessing it might be to do with this....

Cuts have left our troops with mission impossible in Libya and Afghanistan - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/8678317/Cuts-have-left-our-troops-with-mission-impossible-in-Libya-and-Afghanistan.html)

[glad rag]

Ah yes the TELEGRAPH.

Font of all millitary information and personal mouthpiece of retired naval officers.......:hmm:

[Father Jack Hackett]

......and very recently retired/current army officers.....

[NutLoose]

I thought it was standard practice to wait for some major disaster to occur in the World, then slip out the redundancies whilst the press and everyone elses gaze is diverted elsewhere.

[2Planks]

I smell the interference of the pollys. RAF Tranche 2 announcements had already been slipped to coincide with that of the Army And Royal Navy so there was only 'one day of bad news'. I suspect that they wanted to push it further to the right hoping that Libya is over, also I am sure people above are correct - the more that PVR the cheaper it is; no redundancy, no specialist pay during the period and the reduction in pension because you have PVR'd (standfast all over 49). I wonder how many extra times the brass bell will ring at Hot Air Command this week?

[Yozzer]

Todays News from Sky:
Cuts to the armed forces may leave them unable to carry out their duties after 2015, a Government committee has warned. The Defence Select Committee said without firm commitments to improved funding, Britain's politicians risk "failing" the country's military. The report has rejected the Prime Minister's assurance that the UK retains a "full spectrum" defence capability.

October's Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) outlined plans to reduce the Army by 7,000 and the Royal Navy and RAF by 5,000 each as part of a cost-cutting exercise. The review also saw the scrapping of some equipment, including the Nimrod MRA4 reconnaissance planes and Harrier jump jets and the early withdrawal of HMS Ark Royal . The committee warns that the National Security Strategy unveiled last autumn was in danger of becoming no more than a "wish list" unless the necessary money was committed to deliver the future armed forces envisaged for 2020 and beyond.

In July Defence Secretary Liam Fox announced that spending on equipment will increase by 1% above inflation each year after 2015 to pave the way for the so-called Future Force 2020. And he has told Sky News that extra funding will always be available for the military. The Defence Committee said it was "not convinced that, given the current financial climate and the drawdown of capabilities arising from the SDSR, UK armed forces will be able do what is asked of them after 2015".

Committee chairman James Arbuthnot said: "Decisions for post-2015 funding will have to be made in the very near future to ensure progress towards Future Force 2020. "If the ambition of a real-term funding increase is not realised, we will have failed our Armed Forces." The report said the SDSR failed to show how decisions like the withdrawal of the Ark Royal and the Harriers will allow the armed forces to undertake the tasks handed to them. It also raised concerns about Britain's ability to be able to continue fighting in Libya and Afghanistan.

Perhaps the anchor has been deployed or at least a brake chute to enable some consolidation of facts to be considered before continuing the massacre. I suspect that the PVR Express (if indeed is factual rather then gamesmanship hot air) may have too much momentum already to prevent a Manning crisis downstream. The suggested crisis may be looming large over the horizon already. Unfortunately these pages do not provide info on ground force PVR rates from any services. Does anybody who frequents E-Goat, Arsse or a Navy equivelent(?) know what the shop-floor speak is on those forums?

[high spirits]

Actually, I can feel some sympathy with the current regime. Look at the ex Military names involved in the Commons Select Cttee discussion. The very names who spanked £38 billion of taxpayers money over and above the defence budget that they were given, and now just sit around carping from the House of Lords.

Stinking hypocrites....

[Yozzer]

Actually, I can feel some sympathy with the current regime.

In the UK; everbody from PM down believes that these island shores are safe from intrusion. Yet a visit to the towns and villages of northern France and Belgium is; and always will be, a humbling dose of reality. Maybe in centuries to come these words will be diluted to a point of irrelevence; but IMHO, the security of the UK and Europe remains as fragile as it has been for decades. The UK Defence Plc typically engaged in someones fight every 10 years or so; and today we fight on two active fronts in addition to the hidden war against terrorism on our own doorstep. Perhaps if we had a few more war cemetaries in the UK then Defence would be placed in the 'important folder' at No10; mandated by public opinion. In sum: Joe Public take for granted their sleep at night, and sadly it will take a UK 9/11 or two to change that.

[rarelyathome]

Better news from the latest policy 180:

• Zeroing of Leave at 3 yearly Intervals. The policy of zeroing of unused carried-forward leave at 3 yearly intervals has ceased (promulgated in IBN 09/11 on 1 Jul 11).

• Zeroing of Leave on-Assignment. The policy of zeroing unused carried-forward leave on assignment will cease with immediate effect. However, this policy will not be applied retrospectively.

• Carry-forward of Leave. Annual carry-forward of leave remains at 15 days. In exceptional circumstances, such as being unable to take leave due to deployments, being employed directly in support of operations, or undertaking long courses etc, individuals can apply through their Chain of Command to carry-forward balances in excess of 15 days.:)

[Doobry Firkin]

''As far as I understand with both mil redundancies and VERS having been considerably more popular than anticipated, there is a lack of cash in the pot to meet the redundancy payments''........

Really Maxibon. I'll accept that VERS was massively oversubscribed but the RAF redundancy applications for tranche 1 were running at approx 50% up take. I wouldn't say thats 'considerably more popular than anticipated'. I know guys who are volunteering for afghan so they 'can't be made redundant'! Last thing i heard was Tranche 1 will be 50% volunteers the rest will be pushed. I feel sorry for anyone who's pushed but it could be the best thing that ever happens to them in the long run.

[Fortissimo]

Isn't a delay in the Tranche 2 announcement a good thing? Unless you actually want to be made redundant, that is (or it compresses the timescale from application/selection to exit). And it is also worth remembering that the redundancies have been forced on all 3 Services in an attempt to sort out the budget - I don't suppose any of the Boards came up with this idea for fun. If the delay helps to ensure a better outcome, then it gets my vote.

I don't know what the change in accounting policy is, but suspect it may be due to the rules on how you account for manpower costs. It used to be that you could only claim half the capitation cost for the year in which someone left. Perhaps one of our RP friends could help here?

Rum Punch, I don't share your view on the need to keep recruiting. The redundancy fields will be aimed at maintaining the best possible balance across rank, trade and age profiles. The drawdown is a given, but you still have to feed people in at the lower levels or you will have a black hole appear further down the line and, in the meantime, an experience bulge that holds up promotion flow and rots people off even further. My experience of strategic manpower planning was limited (and now dated) but was enough to let me know that it is much more difficult than many people would believe - there is a reason for the huge HR industry out there in the civilian world.

[Herc-u-lease]

the haze of 2011 means i can't remmeber the exact details. Don't the redundancy terms change significantly in 2013? (for the worse, obviously).

[Hugh FW]

And do those 2013 changes affect both AFRS06 and AFRS10?

[ProSentia]

Yes, 2013 should mark the point when those of us on AFPS 75 will receive only 3 months pay as a redundancy settlement in lieu of the current maximum of 9 months. This was set in train many years ago and the AMP Briefing Team advised the assembled masses at Cranwell last year that the intent was to ensure parity of treatment for all redundees whether they are in Tranche 1, 2 or 3. ie, Tranche 3 guys won't be worse off than Tranche 1 guys.

Intent, though, isn't the same as Promise.

[Yozzer]

Call me a cynic:

"Your a Cynic!!"
But since when has a promise from Manning meant anything?

[Climebear]

The 31 March 2013 date (after which AFRS10 compensation payments were reduced from a max of 9 months pay to a max of 3 months pay) was changed to 31 December 2015 by Statutory Instrument 2011 No.208 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2011/208/pdfs/uksi_20110208_en.pdf),

Details are in 2011DIN01-056.

[North Front]

Again, I am about to be unfashionable and suggest that there may be method... Rather than conspiracy... Behind this decision. The problem with reducing numbers as early as originally planned is that nobody yet knows what size and shape the services need to be in the wake of he defence reform unit studies. We can reduce numbers by redundancy but how can we be sure we have the right people left when no one knows what people we need... Joint forces command, amalgamating the air staff and air command... Defence procurement review etc. The decision to delay is actually pretty sound.

[Biggus]

If nobody "knows what people we need", how did anybody come up with the numbers for:

The size of the RAF by 2015

The size of the fields in Tranche one.


Don't tell me, let me guess, it is all about the size of the RAF we can afford, or a straightforward % reduction of the manpower we had a few years ago?


By the way, I agree with GD107. I know of a couple of complete wasters, who could never be winkled out of their cosy little empire, who have suddenly volunteered for an OOA in the next few months - so making them safe from Tranche 1 (about to deploy) and 2 (deployed) and possibly even 3 under the old dates. Hopefully this move may scupper their plans, but I won't be holding my breath.....

[Surplus]

Heard on an extended grapevine that the takeup of redundancy in tranche one by aircrew was so high that there may be few or none required in tranche two. Anybody with any reliable info on this?

[sidewayspeak]

Any scuttlebutt on the next redundancy tranche? It has all gone quiet - but someone must have a friendly ear somewhere...?

[Willard Whyte]

Well, Libya's done and dusted and we're pulling out of 'Ghan soon enough.

Might as well scrap ISTAR and raze Waddo to the ground.

[FATTER GATOR]

What's your address?

[Could be the last?]

I've heard that the Tranche 2 requirements will be released in the New Year!

Also, due to the uptake of options, redundancy and PVRs, that aircrew will not figure that highly. Who knows?

However, if your a NAV or an AEO with no ac to fly or return too, don't worry about redundancies anyway, you've a job for life............:mad:

[Just This Once...]

Quite a few Navs who applied for Tranche 1 but didn't get it are starting to realise that PVR may be the only way out if the rumours regarding Tranche 2+ are correct.

With the 100% cut in FP on PVR on the near horizon the gentle optimism that leaving under redundancy would see them with an additional cash lump sum is becoming quite an expensive hit.

[Widger]

DASA have just produced the full redundancy statistics here:
Defence Analytical Services and Advice (http://www.dasa.mod.uk/applications/newWeb/www/index.php?page=48&thiscontent=5100&date=2011-11-10&pubType=0&PublishTime=09:30:00&from=home&tabOption=1)

[Just This Once...]

I'm still amazed that out of 920 RAF Tranche 1 redundancies 350 of them were aircrew including 155 pilots and 95 navs!

[Duncan D'Sorderlee]

I was slightly surprised that of the 'up to 20' gp capts that they planned to make redundant, 25 got given the boot (there were 30 volunteers!). Or is my maths (or even my English) rubbish!

Duncs:ok:

[Could be the last?]

I have heard that a number of personnel who were identified for compulsory redundancy have appealed, and have been re-instated. Something to do with the process/board using old OJARs???

[ENFP]

As if the process isn't painful enough they do this :hmm:

[Could be the last?]

So the DASA Stats and OJAR issues have raised a few questions on the credibility of the processes used for the redundancy selection criteria.

So the question now is:

If you were not eligible for redundancy in Tranche 1 (seniority/deployment) but are for Tranche 2 (subject to AirMan using similar criteria), are you now at a disadvantage and a greater risk of redundancy, because the required numbers were not achieved in Tranche 1? :confused:

[Lima Juliet]

I looked at the stats from DASA and I couldn't see any FAA pilots being made redundant - does that mean that Sharkey's boy should apologise for his churlish outburst last year?

Mr Cameron witnessed first-hand the visceral anger the Harrier pilots feel over the decision to abandon the Harrier fleet to save money when he addressed members of the Armed Forces working at the Permanent Joint Headquarters at Northwood. There he encountered Lt Cdr Kris Ward, 37, who has flown more than 140 combats in Afghanistan and also happens to be the son of Cdr Nigel “Sharkey” Ward, who commanded the Harrier Squadron during the Falklands conflict. “I am now potentially facing unemployment,” Ward Jr told the Prime Minister. “How am I supposed to feel about that, sir?”

:E

LJ

[gijoe]

LJ,

Wrong facts - read page 11.

5 x SO3s, 5 x SO2s selected.

...agreed, he did make himself look a bit of a knob!

:ok:

[Lima Juliet]

GI Joe

Thanks, guess I'm also guilty of being a kn0b for not being able to see it - I also see they had 5x SO2s and 10x SO3s volunteer though for the 5 of each posts actually made redundant.

Humble pie being eaten for lunch...

LJ

[Pontius Navigator]

I was slightly surprised that of the 'up to 20' gp capts that they planned to make redundant, 25 got given the boot (there were 30 volunteers!). Or is my maths (or even my English) rubbish!

Duncs:ok:

No probably not. They have done this before where they have gone above target in anticipation of pleasing more now and sparing some pain in future cuts in the near term.

Would you rather a disgruntled gp capt went or stayed?

[Duncan D'Sorderlee]

PN,

Good point; however, my point was that the brief was for 'up to 20' and 25 went. Does that mean that the redundancy fields are irrelevant? I know of a number of disgruntled individuals who applied and were not selected; some of them have chosen to leave on PVR terms - without the extra cash that those disgruntled gp capts now have.

Duncs:ok:

[Could be the last?]

After considerable searching for a formal statement of what I would be paid on redundancy, it is interesting to be informed that an individual will only be made aware once he/she has been selected.

My point - how can an individual make an informed decision (voluntary redundancy) based on a a computer prog that has a disclaimer saying it is only a guide?

[QTRZulu]

Could be,

I fully understand where you are coming from and even speaking to the occasionally helpful peeps in Glasgow will not help. I can only speak from my own experience, but I am actually getting a bit more than the on-line tool predicted although sadly not enough for that new Aston Martin I've had my eye on:(

I'm fully aware that everyone will be different, but the only way you will actually know is to go for it. You could also try the AFPS as they offer impartial advice that is well worth the £30 per year membership fee :ok:

[Could be the last?]

QTR - it is just the uncertainty of taking the decision based on purely the redundancy calculator. The FPS have been very helpful, SPVA just slope off to the redundancy focal point at HQ Air! The FP will only speak with HR (PSF) and have stated an individual will only be told once they have been selected!! I give up!! :ugh::ugh::ugh:

[top_cover]

Has anything been published yet as to when the next Tranche is to be announced? There seems to be a lot of uncertainty around the bazars as we all wait for the next round of the Job lottery. People are wanting to know what the future holds and wether or not we have to start looking for that next career.

[Mach Two]

Unless things change between now and then, I wouldn't expect to hear anything until the end of Jan at the earliest. My feeling is that there won't be many aircrew - at least, none that haven't applied.

[fin1012]

something cane round at work the other day - reckoned 10 Jan for the next redundancy fields announcement.....

[R 21]

Blunties recon 9 Jan 12 the numbers will be announced and application process started (if you want it) and final decision by 29 May 12.

[Whenurhappy]

I understand that Tranche 2 will be announced on 17 Jan 12.

[Jumping_Jack]

Indeed. Window for applications open 17 Jan to 28 Feb. Notifications on 12 Jun. :bored:

[Party Animal]

I can understand delaying the announcement of Tranche 2 away from 1 Jan, as most people will be on holiday then. But it seems a bit odd to make the redundancy call mid-month on 12 Jun? Would have thought 1 Jul would be better, with those on 12 months notice officially leaving on 30 Jun 13 as oppossed to presumably 11 Jun 13. Just seems a bit strange to my organised SO mindset...

[Biggus]

Earlier in June there appear to be various Queen's Diamond Jubilee holiday events. No doubt it was considered "bad form" to have news of RAF redundancies potentially distracting news attention from the celebrations?






There is at least one good point about the 9 months separation between the announcements for tranche 1 and 2. I know of some people who never ever went OOA, and could be considered dead wood, but, when the initial dates for the tranches were first announced, they suddenly volunteered for a 6 month OOA, carefull timing of which made them ineligible for both tranches 1 and 2. Hopefully the delay in tranche 2 will now make them vulnerable to a process which has seen far more worthy individuals already shown the door....

[Melchett01]

Indeed. Window for applications open 17 Jan to 28 Feb. Notifications on 12 Jun.

According to the DIN, this will be the last main round of redundancies (until the next lot!) for the RAF and RN bar a few OF5s and 6s and senior medical staff. So if you want it, now's the time to go for it, and if you don't want it, keep your head down and fingers crossed for 6 months.

[Just This Once...]

So after the delay Tranche 2 is finally here. I wonder what the day will bring and what clues it will give regarding the sort of structure we will have in the coming years.:uhoh:

[Jumping_Jack]

Jaffas have taken a hit this time.....

[Mach Two]

Everyone here is in quiet mode. Fingers crossed.

[Jumping_Jack]

DIN has been released, info is now out there..

[Startrek3]

Grateful if some kind soul could post the light blue details here for those of us currently on Herrick.

[Willard Whyte]

Trade
Rank
Seniority
(as at 17 Jan 12)
Ground Trades Exclusions
Tranche 2 Quota
A Eng Tech
WO
Greater than 3 years
EED on or before 1 Apr 15
Personnel currently employed in SAGE/AGE appointments as at 17 Jan 12.
Personnel currently employed in Airborne Technician appointments as at 17 Jan 12.
Up to 5
FS
EED on or before 1 Apr 15
Personnel currently undertaking or completed Licensed Engineer Training on Shadow or Voyager only.
Personnel currently employed in SAGE/AGE appointments as at 17 Jan 12.
Personnel currently employed in Airborne Technician appointments as at 17 Jan 12.
Personnel currently undertaking Rivet Joint training.
Up to 15
A Tech(Av)
Sgt
Greater than 3 years
EED on or before 1 Apr 15
Personnel currently undertaking or completed Licensed Engineer Training on Shadow or Voyager only.
Personnel currently undertaking Rivet Joint training.
Personnel who hold any of the following competencies:
Q-E3-AT( R)|RAF
Q-E3-AT( D)|RAF
Q-E3-AT( C)|RAF
X308E3D Sentry AEW Mk 1 Airborne Tech
Q-AAST-AGE|RAF
Q-AE3-AG|RAF
Q-AHER-GE|RAF
Q-AHJ-AGE|RAF
Q-AN-RAGE|RAF
Q-AN2-SC|RAF
Q-ATS-AGE|RAF
Q-ATS-AGE10 - TriStar Aircraft Ground Engineer|RAF
Q-AVCK-GE|RAF
Q-ANMRA4-AGE|RAF
Q-AC17-AGE|RAF
Up to 30
Cpl
Greater than 3 years
EED on or before 1 Apr 15
Personnel who are currently undertaking or have completed Licensed Engineer Training on Shadow or Voyager only.
Personnel currently undertaking Rivet Joint training.
Up to 75
A Tech(M)
Cpl
Greater than 3 years
EED on or before 1 Apr 15
Personnel who are currently undertaking or have completed Licensed Engineer Training on Shadow or Voyager only.
Personnel currently undertaking Rivet Joint training.
Up to 95
A Eng Tech A/P
Chf Tech

EED on or before 11 Jun 13
All
Sgt

EED on or before 11 Jun 13
All
Eng Tech P
Chf Tech

EED on or before 11 Jun 13
All
Eng Tech W
Cpl
Greater than 3 years
EED on or before 1 Apr 15
Up to 40
ICT Tech
WO
Greater than 3 years
EED on or before 1 Apr 15
Up to 10
Gen Tech E
Sgt
Greater than 3 years
EED on or before 1 Apr 15
Up to 5
Cpl
Up to 10
Gen Tech M
Sgt
Greater than 3 years
EED on or before 1 Apr 15
Up to 5
Cpl
Up to 35
Gen Tech WS
Sgt
Greater than 3 years
EED on or before 1 Apr 15
Up to 1
Cpl
Up to 5
SAC (T) and Jnr Tech
Up to 10
PTI
WO
Greater than 3 years
EED on or before 1 Apr 15
Up to 5
FS
Up to 15
Sgt
Up to 40
Cpl
Up to 35
Painter and Finisher
FS

EED on or before 11 Jun 13
All
Sgt
Cpl
SAC
Air Cart
WO
Greater than 3 years
EED on or before 1 Apr 15
Up to 1
Sgt
Up to 5
Cpl
Up to 5
Photo
Sgt
Greater than 3 years
EED on or before 1 Apr 15
Up to 10
Cpl
Up to 15
Logs (Chef)
WO
Greater than 3 years
EED on or before 1 Apr 15
Up to 5
FS
Up to 5
Sgt
Up to 10
Cpl
Up to 35
Logs (Cat)
WO
Greater than 3 years
EED on or before 1 Apr 15
Up to 1
Pers Spt
WO
Greater than 3 years
EED on or before 1 Apr 15
Up to 10
FS
Up to 10




NCA
Trade
Rank
Seniority (as at 17 Jan 12)
NCA Exclusions
Tranche 2 Quota
WSOp (EW/Aco)
MACR
Greater than 3 years
EED on or before 1 Apr 15
Assigned to SAR flying appointments as at 17 Jan 12.
Assigned to an MPA Seedcorn appointment.
Assigned to Rivet Joint OCU or already qualified on Rivet Joint as at 17 Jan 12.
Up to 5
FS
Up to 5
Sgt
Greater than 8 years
Up to 10




SENIOR OFFICERS
Rank
Branch
Seniority (Substantiated on or before)
Senior Officer Exclusions
Tranche 2 Quota
Air Cdre
Flying
01 Jul 10
EED on or before 11 Dec 12
Up to 15
Eng CE
Pers
Regiment
Med & Dental
Eng AS
01 Jan 09
Logs
01 Jul 11
Gp Capt
Flying
01 Jan 08
Up to 30
Eng CE
Prov(Sy)
01 Jan 09
Logs
Eng AS
Regt
01 Jan 11
Pers
01 Jul 08




OFFICERS
Branch
Spec
Rank
Seniority (as at 17 Jan 12)
Officer Exclusions
Tranche 2 Quota
Engineer
AS
Wg Cdr
Greater than 3 years
EED on or before 1 Apr 15
Up to 15
Sqn Ldr
Up to 30
Flt Lt
Up to 35
CE
Wg Cdr
Greater than 3 years
EED on or before 1 Apr 15
Up to 5
Flt Lt
Up to 10
Ops (Spt)
ABM
Wg Cdr
Greater than 3 years
EED on or before 1 Apr 15
Up to 5
ATC
Wg Cdr
Flt Ops
Wg Cdr
Flt Lt
Up to 10
Pers
Any
Wg Cdr
Greater than 3 years
EED on or before 1 Apr 15
Up to 10
Sqn Ldr
Up to 60
Flt Lt
Up to 50
Logistics

Wg Cdr
Greater than 3 years
EED on or before 1 Apr 15
Up to 5
Sqn Ldr
Greater than 4 years
Up to 25

[Startrek3]

Thanks Willard.

If I am reading it correctly it looks like no officer aircrew below the rank of Gp Capt are eligible!!

[OpsLoad8]

From the DIN:

http://i1166.photobucket.com/albums/q603/opsload8/T2-P1.jpg

http://i1166.photobucket.com/albums/q603/opsload8/T2-P2.jpg

http://i1166.photobucket.com/albums/q603/opsload8/T2-P3.jpg

http://i1166.photobucket.com/albums/q603/opsload8/T2-P4.jpg

http://i1166.photobucket.com/albums/q603/opsload8/T2-P5.jpg

http://i1166.photobucket.com/albums/q603/opsload8/T2-P6.jpg

http://i1166.photobucket.com/albums/q603/opsload8/T2-P7.jpg

Good luck to all and stay safe wherever you are.

[Just This Once...]

With over 300 productive aircrew (plus another 200 or so in trg) lost in Tranche 1 the very low numbers of aircrew in Tranche 2 is quite a shift. Did they cut back too far or has the recent near-exodus finally shaken them awake?

Good luck to all with whatever comes next.

[Scuttled]

Admin officers and PTIs seem, proportionally, to have taken a hammering.

[Willard Whyte]

Sorry about the formatting, not sure how to post a table.

[Mach the Knife]

Where are the pilot slots, was hoping to avoid the need to PVR!

[Just This Once...]

Some of the trades (eg Painter & Finishers) have a quota listed as 'All'. I'm I reading this wrong or are they really looking to get rid of all of them?

[Courtney Mil]

That's how I read it, JTO. Everyone that doesn't fit in the exlusion. Waiting for a briefing at lunchtime from buddy at HQ Air.

[NutLoose]

News is saying

As we continue with the redundancy process, we will ensure we retain the capabilities that our armed forces will require to meet the challenges of the future.
"The redundancy programme will not impact adversely on the current operations in Afghanistan, where our armed forces continue to fight so bravely on this country's behalf."
MoD officials said 400 Gurkhas with more than six years' service would be made redundant under the plans along with 500 infantry privates.
The Army will also lose eight Brigadiers and 60 Lieutenant Colonels.
Posts earmarked to go at the Royal Navy include five Commodores, 17 Captains, 19 Royal Marine officers at Lieutenant Colonel, Colonel and Brigadier ranks while around 80 Fleet Air Arm jobs will go.
In the RAF, up to 15 Air Commodores and 30 Group Captains will be among the posts to be axed.

[Red Line Entry]

Just This Once,

I think that the Painters and Finishers are an obsolescent trade and have been for the past 3 or 4 years. The work transferred to contractors some time ago, albeit with RAF Servicemen as 'GFx' to reduce contract costs while the manpower was still in the RAF. I guess that this will be the mechanism to get rid of the last few remaining in light blue.

[A2QFI]

At the risk of being coned in searchlights and shot down in flames - who paints and finishes the few aircraft we have in service?

[Red Line Entry]

About 3 years ago Serco got the contract at a bunch of FJ stns. Don't know if they still have it.

[NutLoose]

At the risk of being coned in searchlights and shot down in flames - who paints and finishes the few aircraft we have in service?


Judging by some of the patchwork quilt VC10 tanker and Herc schemes, they were done by Class 6, Carterton primary School.

[DSAT Man]

'Admin officers and PTIs seem, proportionally, to have taken a hammering.'

This figure is actually a bit misleading. Most of the 110 will come from ex-PEdOs and Trainers whom the shinies have decided are no longer required. You can bet that when all the appications are in, very few of the selected ones will be from the old Pers (Spt) specialistion. Many of them will be denied redundancy while the PEdOs and Trainers will be euthanised.:*

[Just This Once...]

I guess that this will be the mechanism to get rid of the last few remaining in light blue.

Red Line, TVM as I didn't know all the painters were being ditched and does answer the question as to why I found it so hard to get a deployed composite ac rubbed down and repainted a while back!

Perhaps my example of painters was off the mark but the list also shows that all chf tech & sgt A Eng Tech A/P as well as all the chf tech Eng Tech Ps share the same fate. Seems quite dramatic for those involved!

[Duncan D'Sorderlee]

Up to another 20 NCA to go as well - including sgts this time.

(excluding RJ/SAR/Seedcorn)

Duncs:ok:

[iglide]

JTO

"Perhaps my example of painters was off the mark but the list also shows that all chf tech & sgt A Eng Tech A/P as well as all the chf tech Eng Tech Ps share the same fate. Seems quite dramatic for those involved!"

These are the chaps that have not undertaken the cross-training to Aircraft Tech Mechanical.

[Biggus]

I will offer the following observation (some might disagree with me, but there's nothing new there)...

I personally know of at least a handful of aircrew, non pilots, both Flt Lt and Sqn Ldr, who have spent the last 10+ years in cozy, out of the way jobs, going nowhere near the "front line" in UK, let alone anywhere overseas. When the criteria for tranche 1 were announced, i.e. OOA = safe, they put their hands up for OOA tours, and most seem to have succeeded in getting one. Having therefore survived tranche 1, it now appears that, with no aircrew in tranche 2, they are safe to continue in their "feathering their own nest" mode for the remainder of their careers - on the basis that a leopard doesn't change its spots.

In the meantime, some damn good individuals have been shown the door....


Feel free to disagree with me, it's what normally happens!

[GalleyTeapot]

Biggus,

The ARE aircrew in T2, up to 20 NCA.

[Biggus]

Sorry, didn't mean to imply NCA aren't aircrew...... You are correct of course, in that I should have said something along the lines of "..with no officer aircrew in tranche 2...".

However, it's a testimony to the quality of NCA is that all the work dodgers I know and was referring to are officers, and I do actually know quite a lot of NCA as well!!

[GalleyTeapot]

:ok::ok::ok:

[SRENNAPS]

What a sad, sad list. It is truly sickening to read. I feel for all involved. :sad:

[Pontius Navigator]

My former contract manager moved on to take the painting and finishing contract for the whole of the RAF. One comment at the time was that they had just painted the Cranwell Hawk!

[D-State]

220+ Trade Group 1 NCOs/SNCOs! Engineering supervision! Aircraft availability! Priceless! :ugh:

[PACU]

Anyone know anything about how if at all the aircrew of the FAA will be affected?

[The Old Fat One]

Biggus,

The military has always had it time servers and chisellers...nothing new. There are plenty outside as well. It was ever thus.

I would not lose too much sleep over it if I were you...nobody can change human nature, no matter how hard they would wish to.

[orca]

PACU,

No current drivers or lookers. There are fields for Lt AV (up to 5) and a lot of places for handlers, controllers and phots. There are also fields for FAA 1 star and OF-5.

Regards,

Orca.

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Anyone know anything about how if at all the aircrew of the FAA will be affected?

Pontius Navigator says PACU, lots I am told, IRO 88.

Orca says PACU,

No current drivers or lookers. There are fields for Lt AV (up to 5) and a lot of places for handlers, controllers and phots. There are also fields for FAA 1 star and OF-5.

Regards,

Orca.

Big variation there guys :confused:

[orca]

I have the table open in front of me:

Small numbers of OF-5 (RN and RM) and Cdre FAA are in the pot with other specialisations.

Cdr FAA and Lt Cdr FAA aren't in any fields.

Lt FAA AV (not pilot/ observer) up to 5 required.

From the lads: Up to 50 handlers, 7 controllers and 25 phots.

[Widger]

The one trade that is going to be critical in years to come is the Chockheads. Whilst there will be skill srequired in aircraft control, flyco, SE, phot etc, the most challenging piece of the puzzle in getting it right on QE and POW, especially in cat and trap operations is in deck handling. Rather tan making these people redundant, they should be packing them off to the USN and FN and elsewhere to gain experience.

I am sure some chiseller will come on here saying that the RN has a plan to ensure retention of core skills but I don't by it. It takes years to develop skills and awareness on a flightdeck, to ensure the safe operation of aircraft. It is these young Naval Airmen (AH), who will be Leading Hand/Petty Office level and therefore supervising operations on the QE/POW, that need to be developed and nutured.

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

I have the table open in front of me:


As did I yesterday at work and I concurred with you which why PN's post was so bloody confusing.

[Pontius Navigator]

Sorry abt that but I was close to what the Torygraph now says - 80 - and I admit my source may have meant all personnel although I think aircrew were mentioned.

[Once A Brat]

iglide.....yep, you're right the legacy EngTech A/P are those who have not cut across to A Tech M! Bit of a moot point really though as the A/P stands, as I'm sure you know, for Airframes Propulsion aka Mech by any other name! Appos were doing this multi-skilling malarkey years before it came fashionable with the bean counters.......the point is the Service loses yet more, highly capable, highly trained and experienced NCOs just at a time where eng supervision experience levels is tending towards being a joke!

The Eng Tech P individuals have no such excuse!

[Ken Scott]

According to the Telegraph -

'Third of RAF Officers to go in new Armed Forces cuts'.

Well, not really, despite what the headline says the text goes on to say that one third of RAF redundancies will be officers.

[airborne_artist]

Quote:
'Third of RAF Officers to go in new Armed Forces cuts'.
Well, not really, despite what the headline says the text goes on to say that one third of RAF redundancies will be officers.

I saw that too. Never let the facts get in the way, etc. ;)

[Red Line Entry]

So are we likely to see a PVR spike among officer aircrew now? How many have been holding on to see if a 9-month tax free lump sum was on offer before pulling the handle? I've honestly no idea - so maybe I should go work in Manning!

[Biggus]

R L E,

Personally I can't see many (any?) non-pilot officer aircrew PVR'ing in the near future....


Quite what the RAF intends to be with ME JO WSOs in their 40s with no aircraft to fly I'm not sure!

[Wrathmonk]

ME JO WSOs in their 40s

Genuine question as I've never been ME - but as the individuals you describe must all be PA what sort of numbers are you talking about?

[ORAC]

Grauniad: Ministry of Defence handling of job cuts grotesque, say MPs (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jan/25/defence-job-cuts-grotesque-mps)

Committee says it is shocking that military personnel are being subjected to compulsory redundancy while civil servants are not

MPs have damned as "grotesque" the way members of the armed forces are being subjected to compulsory redundancy while no civil servants at the Ministry of Defence have been asked to leave against their will. The Commons cross-party defence committee dismisses explanations given by ministers and senior officials, describing the different treatment meted out to military personnel and civil servants as "shocking".

In their report (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmdfence/1635/163502.htm), which is withering even by the standards of their frequent attacks in the past on MoD practices, the MPs say theft and fraud in the ministry continues to rise, the ministry does not appear to want to "understand the costs of its current operations", and it is "hiding behind official security classifications" to suppress information. They also deplore the Treasury's failure to explain what it is doing to persuade the MoD to comply with official financial reporting standards. And – ironically, given the £35bn-plus black hole in the defence budget – the ministry underspent last year to the tune of more than £6bn, the report discloses.

The MPs say the MoD "should consider whether the terms of redundancy offered to either the military or civilian staff are fair or appropriate in the light of the stark and shocking difference between the application of compulsion in redundancy to the two branches of service in the MoD". They add: "For military redundancies to be compulsory in 40% of cases, yet for civilian redundancies to be compulsory in none, is so grotesque that it requires an exceptionally persuasive reason."......................

[teeteringhead]

And another difference is:

CS have Unions

Uniforms don't

.... could there be any connection??????

[alfred_the_great]

Or it could be the Defence Select Committee have their head so far up their own arses, they can't see that they're talking ****. Having read the report, they singularly fail to understand how we are doing redundancies.

[Courtney Mil]

One thing to bear in mind. When I was made redundant in 2007, those of us that had volunteered, once accepted, became compulsory. In other words, everyone leaving the RAF was a compulsory redundancy whether they had volunteered or not.

Courtney

[Melchett01]

Caused a bit of harrumphing amongst some of the CS at my end of the trench. To a man they all believe that the CS are more flexible than the military in terms of employability. I was sorely tempted to point out that we are so inflexible that one of our number has just picked up a short notice weekend duty officer without grumbling, but which the equivalent CS would expect significant overtime payments to do.

Of course it could just be a case that James Arbuthnott and Ursuala Brennan don't see eye to eye on this. Alternatively, Arbuthnott could have just delivered the very pointed question of whether or not whether the MOD exits to support the defence of the UK or to provide CS with a career. Lately, I think it is the later of the 2, in which case, that they are also unionised as pointed out by Teeteringhead will undoubtedly come in to play here.

[ORAC]

whether or not whether the MOD exits to support the defence of the UK Freudian slip there; the exit of the MOD might well be seen by many as supporting the future defence of the country...... :E

[Grimweasel]

Mistake in Redundancy DIN

I take it most people are aware of the possible error in the Redundancy DIN? It states the Special Capital Payment (ie Redundancy payment) is TAX FREE. This is incorrect as only the first £30K of any redundancy payment (inc cash value of any other 'gifts') is tax free. Above that threshold, amounts are taxed at 40% I believe and it's then up to you to claim back any money due. This could have implications for some higher ranked redundees. I'm sure Al could clarify?

See http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/guidance/redundancy-factsheet.pdf

[Grimweasel]

Just this once - thanks for the update - I hope this is true as my tax advisor said it was unlikely we sat outside of it. Should have an answer back this week hopefully!

[Grimweasel]

Thanks. Found the info here:
http://mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/0E5372B7-0CC6-4CE6-A139-C6AA26B5196E/0/Redundancybookletjan07.pdf

Mentions tax free payment. I just hope the tax rules have not changed since this was published in 2007. You know how weasely this current lot are.

[Harley Quinn]

You know how weasely this current lot are.

No more so than the last lot

[Grimweasel]

Spoke with a chap who was made redundant from HRMC this morning. He said it would be very unlikely indeed that the MoD sat outside of normal tax rules for everyone else based on the very generous offer (above stat' norms) that we were getting anyway.

He also said watch the next budget because there will be a raid on tax saving schemes - expect the 40% tax relief on personal pension contributions to be axed too. This Government just wants us all to die poor. All it will do is leave more people claiming off the state in the future. They should look at the Laffer Curve and understand the optimum revenue producing level of taxation. Set it too high and revenues fall as people spend resources evading tax - too low and there is not enough revenue.

Interestingly, he did say if you are Non-Dom status and you don't want to pay tax on investments held abroad etc you just pay the HRMC £30K a year. Now if you are a multi-millionaire this sounds like a very cheap deal to me. Small price to pay for not having your billions raided abroad!!

[Al R]

Mmm. Not sure about that, and the jury is still out. I can certainly see George considering limiting pension tax free cash or lowering contributions, and possibly tweaking tax relief. But as ever, get the basics right. Consider whether your partner should have one (even/especially if they don't pay tax) and time is running out for military big earners to protect their lifetime allowance (especially if they are going on to high earning second careers).

[ghostnav]

Good to see rumours are still available that have no basis of fact! The quality though really has gone down over the past few months. Anyone wonder what the government will do with the RAF once it finishes operations? More redundancies perhaps?

[Melchett01]

Anyone wonder what the government will do with the RAF once it finishes operations? More redundancies perhaps?

Actually we will never finish operations. What I am about to say is not intended to come across as inter-service bitching, but unlike the Army who post Afghanistan will essentially be confined to barracks, Salisbury Plain and marching up and down Whitehall, the need to defend both the UK airspace and the sea lines of communication mean that both the RAF and the RN will still have a job to do.

expect the 40% tax relief on personal pension contributions to be axed too.

I can't add any more to the rumours alread going round, but I am in 2 minds as to whether or not chopping tax relief on pensions is a good thing ... hear me out.

Pension regulations are horrendously complex and working out whether the tax you save now outstrips the tax you will pay on a pensionable income is fairly tricky given the multitude of factors you have to consider. Therefore, reducing the relief you can claim would certainly make it simpler - especially for the Forces now that there is a 50k / year limit contribution, but according to the DIN, no simple way outside of having a PhD in Pure Maths to calculate exactly how much of that 50k limit we use up. I can't see many people being happy having been encouraged to contribute to a private pension on top of their military pension and then finding themselves with a tax bill.

However, politically it would be suicide. Whilst no doubt trying to extract more from the high paid, scrapping relief would - thanks to fiscal drag - hit a lot of very ordinary families. I can see that going down well come the next election. Plus, it would probably also drive more people to ISAs than pensions: reduced relief up front, taxed when you draw an income - why not go for an ISA where there is no tax at all (barring the nominal rate payable on dividends)? At a stroke, tinkering with the tax relief rates has the potential to actually reduce the govt's tax take rather than increasing it by 20%.

As ever, Melchy's totally unqualified ruminations at the end of a long day. If you want advice, speak to Al R. (Al - I'll PM you with an address for the referal fee :ok:)

[Al R]

The problem now is that politicians are responding to the volatility in the market and mulling over small aspects (such as fettling with tax relief). They are reflecting on the market and pointing to that as excuse. The issue these days with market valuations (whether it's the FTSE, Dow Jones or any of the European indices) is that the numbers at the end of the day are no longer determined solely by traditional basics, such as asset class or company performance.. but as much as anything by the actions of policy makers - the politicians who are spending all this time and effort claiming to be reacting to it.

This market making, this (generally?) unhealthy dependence and over reliance on politicians and central bankers rather than old fashioned market fundamentals has made all of our outcomes far more uncertain and (as a former stockbroker) I know that the one thing that is guaranteed to upset the markets more than anything else is uncertainty. Uncertainty means volatility and the volatility that we are currently witnessing is now irrespective of how many European summits are held or how much of our money is pumped into our economies.

At a very minimum, three tax wrappers that everyone should consider these days; the ISA, the pension and the (on/offshore) Bond.

[Melchett01]

the numbers at the end of the day are no longer determined solely by traditional basics, such as asset class or company performance.. but as much as anything by the actions of policy makers - the politicians who are spending all this time and effort claiming to be reacting to it.

At the risk of a little further thread drift - apologies - I have to concur with you there Al - arguably it is the politicians rather than the markets that are causing the current turmoil. One of the drawbacks of an enlarged EU is the difficulty in reaching a consensus and implementing an effective decision i.e. you can't unless you are on the verge of a crisis which forces you to act. And as you point out that leads to uncertainty and given that fear and greed rather than market fundamentals are the dominant factors in banking and finance, that leads to where we are now.

The bond markets in effectively forcing a change of govt in Italy and Greece were at first accused of being undemocratic in unseating an elected PM. The flip side to that coin is that it is only the financial markets that now have the ability to hold incompetent polticians to account for their failure to govern effectively.

[LFFC]

More sad news, and maybe a tad cynical coming just one week after the Queen's Jubilee.

Army's manning chief infuriates troops with Service transfer quip (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/9322727/Armys-manning-chief-infuriates-troops-with-Service-transfer-quip.html)

The head of Army manning has infuriated troops by suggesting that sacked soldiers should apply for specialist jobs in the RAF or Navy.

Brig Rob Nitsch also admitted that some soldiers would be axed “against their wishes” as redundancy notices are handed to 4,100 soldiers, sailors and airmen tomorrow (tues).
It will be the largest single sacking of troops in the last two decades with at least a third being forcibly axed.

With the Army reducing its size by a fifth to just 82,000 troops it will shed 2,900 soldiers in the second tranche of redundancies in a year

A third of the 900 RAF redundancies will come from its senior officers with 30 group captains, 40 wing commanders and 115 squadron leaders chopped. It is also understood that up to half-a-dozen of the 26 Air Vice Marshals will be go. However no trained pilots will be lost.

[Willard Whyte]

I just hope some of the w*nkers involved in my redundancy get the chop this time around.

I spit on their shiny shoes.

[Kitbag]

The 'reapply for other specialisations' thing has been there since the beginning as most on here will be aware assuming they were either in the bracket themselves, or were responsible for guys in the bracket. Having a go at this Brigadier is simply wrong and distorts the issue.

Surprised so few RN senior officers are going though.

[Melchett01]

Brig Rob Nitsch also admitted that some soldiers would be axed “against their wishes ... However Brig Nitsch did urge sacked troops to join the Territorial Army to continue soldiering at the weekends”

Regardless of the usual inter-service banter and rivalry, I have to say that there are elements of the redundancy process which demonstrates just how out of touch some of the senior policy makers and politicians are with feeling at the coal face.

The Army undeniably needs slimming down to get rid of some of the logistical and administrative tail that is no longer required if you are going to reduce the teeth arms. But to suggest to individuals that having been dismissed they should then join the TA to allow the facade of a well trained and equipped force to be maintained really does demonstrate more front than Brighton as Del Boy might say.

[TwoTunnels]

Hope everyone in the criteria for redundancy tranche 2 get the news they want in 2 hrs time. Good luck for the future, wherever it lies.

TT

[FantomZorbin]

I 'second' that TwoTunnels.

My God, what a way to run a circus?!!!

[SENTRYBOD]

Just been informed that I am safe this time round. Mind you, I had to phone to find out because of some confusion with embargo times and local time zones. Nerves have settled, Mrs S is begining to calm down and life can go on. Best wishes to all others "in the Zone":bored:

[Scuttled]

Two thirds of those getting the letter were volunteers.

[Melchett01]

We had a few for whom it came as a complete shock, especially those with 2 years to run to their immediate pension point. Not good. However, at least it has been handled sympathetically and appropriately round here with news broken to individuals face to face by senior staffs.

[sidewayspeak]

I have personally spoken to several people who have been made compulsory redundant at various points short of an IP point.... e.g chap on my CTW was less than 2 years away. Bast-ardo. I feel for them - they will lose out on hundreds of thousands over the remainder of their lifetime. The MOD have really shown how harsh and disloyal they have become to their staff.

In addition, the waiver on the DIN that introduces just 3 MONTHS notice for future redundancies runs out after 2013. So in future, they can kick you out with just 3 month's notice, but expect you to stay for 12-18 months depending on Service needs! Astounding how they believe that terms and conditions could be so skewed in favour of the MOD.

I wasn't eligible, but have PVR'd anyway. I think I have got out at the right time, and would never recommend it as a career choice for bright youngsters unless they want a few years of finishing school (a la Sandhurst) prior to entering the city/finding a real career job. Not bitter, just personal opinion on the way the generous terms and conditions I joined under have been eroded to the point that it is no longer an attractive option.

Good luck to all who got good/bad news. Take your bag of cash and find someone who appreciates your skills.

[Training Risky]

Crikey, how much goodwill will there be in the retired/reserve component of HM Forces if something properly horrible kicks off in the Middle East/anywhere else.

"Reserve liability...hmmm let me check my files for the I-couldn't-give-a-fu(k letter I have been keeping for MOD since my redundancy!!"

I think the concept of employment for all professions in the UK is moving more and more towards short-term contracts, and away from a career for life. It's certainly what seems to be passing for career management in the military.

Anyone fancy a second career as a mercenary?:ok:

[zedder]

TR,
Some Tranche 1 non-applicant redundees have received letters in the last couple of days telling them that after a policy review they can apply to be exempted from their Reserve and Recall liability.

My reply telling them that I would indeed like them to shove that liability where the sun don't shine will be written before the end of this week!

[Duncan D'Sorderlee]

zedder,

I suggest that you copy Dicky Davies' letter - eloquent is one way of describing it. Not!

Duncs:ok:

[Could be the last?]

I heard that the head of one org at Cranwell, where the OC (Gp Capt) managed to wangle vol red', and his deputy (Wg Cdr) got comp red' - and it is not a small org!!!!

Nice to see that there has been some thought put into who stays and who goes!:ok:

[sidewayspeak]

I heard that the head of one org at Cranwell, where the OC (Gp Capt) managed to wangle vol red', and his deputy (Wg Cdr) got comp red' - and it is not a small org!!!!

Nice to see that there has been some thought put into who stays and who goes!

That same organisation had several more vol and comps - nearly a third of their staff!

[Melchett01]

So are we counting Ursula Brennan's departure back to Ministry of Justice as part of the redundancies? Or just about the only bit of good news in another wise pretty bad day for many in Defence?

[hello1]

At least Ursula had some balls.:rolleyes:

[Scuttled]

Explain please?

[Melchett01]

Ursula Brennan had balls? Really? She always appeared ineffectual and evasive when I saw her answering questions. Brains might have been more useful than balls.

[Could be the last?]

New year lay-offs: Army to fire 8,000 soldiers in 'fast-track' redundancies and sackings of over-45s | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2210548/New-year-lay-offs-Army-8-000-soldiers-fast-track-redundancies-sackings-45s.html)



I appreciate that this is in the Daily Mail; however, have these already been taken into account, are they fabricated or are further cuts in Defence on the horizon?:confused:

[The B Word]

The latest AMP Bulletin shows that PVR times are to increase from 6-12 months for some branches (like Eng Tech(M)s ). Seems we've overrshot the requirements to hit our targets yet again :ugh:

Also, we have failed to recruit the 700-odd Reservists we need and there are another 1000 FTRS posts in the offing!

So nothing surprises me anymore...

The B Word

[downsizer]

Is there a link to the latest AMP briefing?

[Courtney Mil]

I love the bit about Army officers retiring at 45. That's going to make the race for the top pretty frantic.

If I didn't know for sure that all this had been so carefully thought throught, I could easily get a touche cynical.

[The B Word]

Downsizer

No, it's on Airspace on the RAF website. But Cos Pers' Bulletin (sorry AMP was wrong) says...

EARLY TERMINATION MINIMUM WAITING TIMES (ET MWT)
*
With effect 1 Nov 12 the ET MWT for Gen Tech(M) will increase for all ranks and engagements from 6 months to 12 months.
*
Early termination minimum waiting times for ground trades are published in the CoE area of the RAF Manning website.* The current waiting times can be found at the following link: http://www.manning.raf.r.mil.uk/review/Manning/CofE_1/early_term_waiting_times.doc%20/o%20http://www.manning.raf.r.mil.uk/review/Manning/CofE_1/early_term_waiting_times.doc (dii only link)

It is UNCLASS as shown in its reference number of "20120924-COSPers Sep Bulletin-U"

Sorry if it's bad news for you...

The B Word

[downsizer]

Thanks, found it on airspace myself just now....

I was more interested in the 700 man shortfall of reserves and 1000 FTRS uplift...where did you hear that? It doesnt seem to be mentioned in the aforementioned document...

[The B Word]

The other was a Cafe One conversation in Air Command with a Staff Officer - this is, after all, a rumour network... :ok:

PS. The extra posts in FTRS were over the next 3 years or so. Things like the Defence Aviation Error Management System (DAEMS), Flight Safety, PTIs, Regt (for CCS trg) and other type stuff that needs experience and continuity.

[downsizer]

Thanks for fleshing it out.... Auggie Sqn near me can't hit full manning due to financial restrictions....

[VinRouge]

time for peeps to start learning the phrase "sorry Sir, it cant be done with the current resource levels". are we carrying manpower levels as an aviation safety risk yet? if not, we bloody should be.

[The B Word]

Downsizer

Source confirmed from the latest IBN 35/12:

FR20 required that RAF enlist 720 Reservists (aged 16-50 yrs) in 2012/13, representing an increase of 100% compared to the 2011/12 target. *This remains a challenging aspiration and as a result, a bespoke marketing campaign has been developed to raise the awareness of RAF Reserves and to drive response to the recruitment pipeline. *

The B Word :ok: