Redundancy Survey

[asdaasbo]

I am currently undertaking my Senior rates Leadership course and my team has been tasked with producing a presentation on the effects of the recent redundancies. The presentation will eventually be given to the 2nd Sea Lord so it is important to gain as much opinion as possible to produce an accurate reflection of how these redundancies have affected personnel. If anyone also has any experience of previous redundancy programmes i would be most grateful for your opinion on how they were handled in the past compared to the recent method.

The main questions are:

1. How could the redundancy scheme have been done bettter?
2. How has it affected the people you work with?
3. How was it handled in the past? ( i.e. what sort of criteria was applied for selection?)
4. Do you think the Government will make a U-turn once it realises the skill set that the forces has lost?
5. Could the money have been saved elsewhere?

I look forward to your responses.

[corporal punishment]

Can I clarify if the questions you have posed in the opening post are ones you have thought of or are they ones you have been told to examine.

I ask because Q3 should be known to the RN anyway and should have been used to inform the new proces when it was being devised.

As a basic tenet, things which affect personnel should be handled with honesty, integrity and openess. Everybody needs to be kept informed and the process and reasons for it should be clear to all.

Cpl P

[sidewayspeak]

1. How could the redundancy scheme have been done bettter?

More money for volunteers. Open the fields for selection wider - loads of willing volunteers were not eligible.


2. How has it affected the people you work with?

Made those that wanted it and didn't get it - dejected.
Those that were made redundant and didn't want - not worth retaining for the 12 months as they are bitter and focusing on their futures.

3. How was it handled in the past? ( i.e. what sort of criteria was applied for selection?)

18-months pay, tax-free. Equally divisive.

4. Do you think the Government will make a U-turn once it realises the skill set that the forces has lost?

No, they need the money for the ever-growing welfare state.

5. Could the money have been saved elsewhere?

Decimate the welfare state - the biggest cancerous disincentive to employment in the UK and cause of the rotting demise of our beautiful country.

[reds & greens]

My take is that it resulted in 4 groups of individuals:

1. Those who applied and were successful: - ecstatic, focussed on the next 6 months and nil return to the Service: correctly selfish.

2. Those who applied and were not successful: - bitter, dejected, focussed on the next tranche and either nil or limited return to Service until the next round is announced.

3. Those who didn’t apply but were selected: - extremely bitter, wholly negative to the Service, felt undervalued and unwanted, counter-productive: correctly selfish.

4. Those who didn’t apply and were not selected: - perhaps the silent majority, but will ultimately have to pick up the fetid results and extra loading of those in groups 1-3.
Only a personal opinion, but I am aware of personnel in all groups and it appears to be a reoccurring theme.

[Kitbag]

I have to say that so far, of those in my area selected against their will, have got on with their job in the manner I would expect.
They are doing their resettlement stuff, but they are also true professionals.

[cazatou]

asdaasbo

I am afraid that there are no easy answers to to your questions. I am old enough to remember the 1975 Redundancy Programme which was promulgated as "Positively the last Redundancy Programme the RAF will ever have".

I left in the 1996 Redundancy Programme

There have been numerous other Programmes over the years - all of which have left a legacy of insecurity ingrained in those who were not selected to be amongst that particular Tranche.

I believe that the fear of Redundancy is now engrained in the Psyche of Service Personnel to the detriment of Operational Efficiency.

[asdaasbo]

They are questions we have come up with. I have only been serving for 7 years and it would be really helpful if we could get a comparison with previous redundancy/ cut back schemes. I understand there was one in the mid 90's and possible early 2004. If your were serving during these cuts it would be good to know how the Services changed. Did they struggle to fulfil tasking? Did the inset of Afghanistan highlight a need for greater recruitment? What i'm trying to highlight is that the MOD aren't learning from lessons in the past but require some information from people with direct experience and opinions to back it up.

Thanks for your comments so far.

[VinRouge]

Are you a journalist? yes or no will suffice.

[dallas]

What i'm trying to highlight is that the MOD aren't learning from lessons in the past but require some information from people with direct experience and opinions to back it up.
The MoD isn't designed to learn, and so will read its epitaph.

[asdaasbo]

No, not a journalist. I'm a killick struggling to put an objective presentation together.

[racedo]

The issue with redundancy and its not just prevalent to RAF is that for those who leave there is an number of stages that need to be gone through.

A psychologist I knew started a business dealing conflict management before branching out into this for companies.

He defined it that those made redundant need to go through stages like a death of someone very close........thought it strange but what he said made sense eventually.

Psychologically your mind and body need to go through stages similar to stages of mourning irrespective of whether you are leaving voluntarily or involuntarily, you are saying good bye to a big element of your life and your body needs time to adjust. Some end up using alcohol / drugs etc as a method of coping.

I questioned how redundancy either way was like that he said anybody who thinks that the death of a loved one is always mourned is nieve.

His viewpoint if that was the case then why are most murders carried out by a loved one. Also why with some people after a death of a loved one do people end up living a completely different lifestyle from before, almost as if now having an opportunity denied previously.

His viewpoint was it can depend on the person BUT those with a good family and support network can manage better sometimes.

Mindful of the fact that some people are desperate to leave, the viewpoint again was that even when getting what you want, you need to stop and give yourself time to adjust as potentially it could be like a PTSD that hits you a lot later.

I guess the RAF need to be mindful that when someone leaves there is a need for follow up with support (if needed).

Also a need to be proactive with this as some people will cope without assistance but others will need some at different times and having that follow up can help.

Apols as has been a bit long winded.

[Old-Duffer]

I went out in the second tranche of the early 1990's scheme, having been rejected at the first tranche. My date of exit was mid-1994 and I was a volunteer.

I left not because I wanted to go (I am still a volunteer reservist working with cadet forces and still keen, even if a little blunted by the years) but because the time was right for me to go. I had come to the end of the best, most challenging tour I had had and having set up a completely new organisation, that went like a dream during GW1, I knew all else would be an anti-climax and for me there would be no promotion and a probable return to work I did not want.

The important thing was to prepare sensibly to leave and to make all the plans well in advance, so that the transition from service to civilian life was no big deal. When doing my final 'clearance' I was able to smile when they took my ID card away and gave me a proforma to cover my last few weeks of terminal leave etc (the guy next to me was almost in tears).

My only gripes were:

a. My posting officer cheated me out of some of my leave entitlement by setting my release date too early and posting in my replacement too late.

b. The system got rid of me (see a above), just before the second stage of one of those split pay & pension rises we had in 1994/5 and so I am forever condemned to a lower increment.

The terms under which I left were generous by service standards (nearly 18 months salary) - but nowhere near as generous as some other areas in the public services - but that's not a complaint.

The most important thing for me was that I was treated by most people in a matter of fact but sensible way and was given accurate and practical advice when I needed it. I did one or two unconventional things with my resettlement training but the system was very flexible. My only complaint relates to (a) above but I never saw my posting officer again so that's OK!

[asdaasbo]

Thank you all for your input so far. Just hoping to bump this topic to gain some further opinions.

[betty swallox]

I hate to say that no matter what you conclude, suggest or find, no one will actually give a monkeys. Unfortunately I feel the Military Covenant has been utterly transgressed. Good luck.

[A and C]

The lasting result of this round of cuts is a lot of people who did not get the redundancy ( be it because They did not want it or were turned down) looking at the big picture and feeling that there is more trouble on the way.

I see a lot of people who would like a future in the RAF spending money to get civilian qualifications as a safety net incase their military career comes to an abrupt halt due to the next round of cuts.

[The Old Fat One]

If you want to give your presentation a slighter wider scope (and a little bit of controversy) you might want to look into a lot of the articles banding about at the moment suggesting that the whole deep recession thing is making a lot of people question the whole concept of the rat race.

It effects redundancy programmes inasmuch as people who are strategically well-place placed look upon the opportunity for redundancy (or early pension schemes) as manner from heaven. The logic is sort of like...

"If I take this retirement option, or this redundancy scheme, with a bit of belt tightening I can rid myself of this rat race forever. And if I do stay in the rat race its only going to shag me up the jacksy no mattter how hard I work anyway, so get out now while they are offering me a golden goodbye."

Recent evidence suggests it is a fast growing trend.

[gijoe]

Valid comments from the Old Fat One I would suggest.

For those that volunteered to go this time round, they should remember that they are doing their bit by leaving six months early and taking six months less wages.

Those that get pushed deserve the 12 months thinking and planning time. The time goes very quickly and the key is preparation through attendance at CTW, selection of training courses and, as above, deciding a course of life.

I, for one, feel that the CTW is much improved on the reports that I heard some years ago but it will not get you a job - there is only one person that can do that.

On a different note - are people getting tired of hearing Cameron say 'We are all in this together'?

....because I don't think I played a part in causing the recession and don't see why I should be punished as a result.

Bye-bye Rat Race!

G:ok:

[A and C]

I would second the opinion of The Old Fat One, I have offered one guy from the last batch of redundencys ( he holds a civil aircraft maintenance engineers licence) a part time job to supplement his pension.

He has no interest ! All he wants to do is wander about in his new camper van and ride his three motorbikes!........... How I envy him!!!!!!!!!!