Commissioned Crewman Leaders

[xenolith]

What’s the deal with commissioned crewman leaders nowadays? I understood that they were being binned but I recently heard that they had been retained on the rotary side.

[TheWizard]

*Pulls up a chair* http://forums.airshows.co.uk/images/smilies/snack.gif

[Equilibrium]

With empowered Masters, why would the system want to undo all their good work? :=

[charliegolf]

Commissioned Loadies:

I understood that they were being binned

No, just their brains. The bins being the ones by the Henlow and Cranwell main gates.

If in doubt, just check for the zip at the back of the head. (Eh, St John's:ok:)

CG

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

just check for the zip at the back of the head. (Eh, St John's:ok:)

CG

I think that particular zip went in post Scuffer trg :p:p:p

[charliegolf]

I think that particular zip went in post Scuffer trg

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

He's gonna be peeved with me, but REALLY annoyed with you!

[cazatou]

CG

I must protest - your Post upset SFFP.

That is most unfair - it was not your turn. There is a waiting list!!

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

He's gonna be peeved with me, but REALLY annoyed with you!

If I get to the reunion this year I will buy him a beer and I am sure he will forgive me if not I will tell all about how Joyce the cleaner almost caught him during a crafty "ND" :E

Caz,

It's a Crewman thread so go dribble elsewhere, oh and remind us again where are you paying your pension tax :p:p:p

[St Johns Wort]

Seldom - Charlie. A zip! Luxury! I was only there for 4 days so a bit of Velcro, super glued in, was the best they could do. The original snowdrop zip had healed over by then.

Seldom. Now that was a good det; Didn’t Jack M*****G ‘break’ his leg on that one;)? And who could forget ‘Captain Gonad’ on the water taxi:eek:!

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Seldom - Charlie. A zip! Luxury! I was only there for 4 days so a bit of Velcro, super glued in, was the best they could do. The original snowdrop zip had healed over by then.

Seldom. Now that was a good det; Didn’t Jack M*****G ‘break’ his leg on that one;)? And who could forget ‘Captain Gonad’ on the water taxi:eek:!

Was indeed, was indeed, hope to see you in Nov if we are back from our travels :ok:

[ukcds]

They do the cr@p jobs proper Rodney's wont do

[Airborne Aircrew]

Jeff L was a proper Rodney... :E

[NutLoose]

There was one at Odious in my time and he was a Grade A

http://www.baldwinbrasshardware.com/images/2007/5405.jpg

I remember him hanging from a Wessex winch in a cargo net after being installed there by the rest of the crews.

[Airborne Aircrew]

Jeff meant well... and was a nice man...

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Jeff meant well... and was a nice man...

My opinion as well however not a populist viewpoint at all.

[globefan]

An interesting debate the 'empowered master' one. Actually intent was for masters to step up to the plate and take on the duties and responsibilities of the commissioned guys...shame so many of them shy away from the real staff work when it comes to it.
Admittedly there was a fair percentage of duff commissioned guys, but let's not kid ourselves that all the MAcr Ldrs are shining stars by any stretch of the imagination. The ongoing debate is where are frontline units from both sides of the divide going to grow their execs from when the Nav trade dies and the pilot numbers get even lower? I would suggest the debate rages on and with the small numbers we'd be talking about there really is room for all. Depends whether the cadre (and the OCs) want to have a representative voice (that is heard) higher up the food chain.
And when the competition was run in recent years there wasn't exactly a shortage of applicants so the interest is still out there. Personal opinion of course.....

[xenolith]

Globefan. WTF is an 'empowered master'? Is there a proper definition. Do they get substitution pay?

Nutloose. Nice self portrait!

[Equilibrium]

They can't receive substitution pay as this would actually mean a pay cut! :ok:

[xenolith]

:suspect:So if it's cheaper to have a commissioned leader???????

[NutLoose]

xenolith

Nutloose. Nice self portrait!


nope, my knob is bigger:O

[globefan]

xenolith: Globefan. WTF is an 'empowered master'?

The result of an ill-thought out plan by a senior officer way back in 02-03 I think, when he decided to stop in-branch commissioning. Little short-sighted some might say....

[Q-SKI]

Empowered Master? How many fell for that one, who is really going to stand and fight your corner at exec level?

[Old Fella]

It is not the end of the world folks. The RAAF has never, in the fifty four years I know of, ever had an operational Flight Engineer or Loadmaster hold a commission. Seems to work OK and I met few, certainly none that come to mind, Warrant Officer Section Leaders who did not have the balls to stick up for their troops when required.

[Q-SKI]

Hear what your saying old fella, seems like things are good in the RAAF,however; I know of several instances when the "empowered Master" was deliberately excluded from execs meetings and sqn planning meetings. Even the sqn cdr at the time admitted that things were dire for the branch (back in 03 or o4 as I remember). Things are moving rapidly, who knows whats ahead?

[xenolith]

So it would seem that the 'Masters' had their way! As I recall they were always very vocal about how they could do the job better than the commissioned incumbent and could replace them at the drop of a ‘bone dome’. I admit they may have had a point; I was around when the pay band review was done in the mid(?) 80’s. The whole thing was discredited as it was obviously hostile having been done by an ex 33 Sqn WO Eng who loathed airman aircrew with a passion. During the next 4 years the AE leaders got their sh1t in one pile and that branch was duly up-banded, the LM branch, whose leaders did didley squat for the troops, stayed in the lower band. I always had the impression that they were smug passengers on their own little gravy train, particularly on the fixed wing side.

[NutLoose]

Although I referred to the one I knew as a total kn*b which to be honest he was, I still cannot fathom the belief that by simply holding a commission the person should be better and more knowledgeable at the job, looking in now from the outside, one see's that is often far from the case, indeed to the detriment of those that know what they are doing, but are over ruled by rank by those that don't, gain smarty points in doing it.

I was always taught to seek out as an Engineer the 20 year SAC OR JT, as they knew the aircraft and systems, it was borne out in practice, but the get promoted or be gone culture has resulted in a orientation to be seen to know what one is doing so one can be promoted, against what the industry has of actually knowing. You now get people in ranks that are in for hopefully a short a time as possible and you lose those that used to have the knowledge base from experience in that rank, which means higher you rapidly rise the dilution of knowledge occurs.

In one respect that is why I find Civilian life better, if you do not cut the mustard you are gone, hence why a lot of ex RAF Engineers can comfortably exceed what the RAF pays the likes of Sqn Ldrs, and freed from what I now see as a semi repressive rank structure shine and get the opportunity to fly...


Such a shame the services do not recognise those people very well and commission them.

I in my service history i had 2 engineering officers who were switched on, recognised the skills below them, utilised and encouraged them, and worked as a team.. the rest were mediocre to be kind, and one..l these days I would have sacked him 10 times over.

[Q-SKI]

Xenolith, I respect your views, but was it not the case that the input for supporting the up banding came mainly from the Master cadre and the commissioned leaders had little involvement? I agree that as a branch we missed a trick and still feel it was a jaded exercise in bean counting. Clear above and behind......

[xenolith]

QSki. 'Clear above and behind' :) haven’t heard that for a while! In answer to your question, my info came from a mate at ISK, after the event (I had left by then). The AE leadership kept it close to their chest for obvious reasons.

NutLoose. Hmmmm,

1. The only engineers in the RAF are commissioned. All else are technicians or mechanics etc.
2. If you want a pop at Eng Os start your own thread.
3. That knob is very shiny. Do you polish it a lot?;)

[NutLoose]

Sorry was using it as an example....

BTW not all "Engineers" in the RAF are commissioned, I know / knew Engineers in the RAF that hold licences and degrees but are not commissioned.

[Jayand]

If you don't hold an Engineering degree your not an engineer! The rest are mechanics or technicians, no matter how good they are.
It's a bit like the cooks in the mess getting called chefs, they are NOT chefs but cooks.

[Jayand]

Ooh what about Logistic support engineers (stackers)!!!!

[force_ale]

What about Flight Engineers, Ground Engineers and Licenced Engineers. There are also Engineering Officers who do not hold degrees, are they not engineers?

[Old Fella]

Jayand and xenolith, what a lot of rot. I know people whom hold an Engineering Degree and could not put a Mechano Set together. I know people that did not go to High School and yet they can construct machines of a very complex nature. I do not know what qualifications you hold, but please do not try to diminish to value of those whom you call mechanics or technicians, nor the cooks for that matter. Using your logic there are no Flight Engineers, Ships Engineers, Railway Engineers or Army Engineers (you know, the ones that build airfields). As others have said, holding a commission does not make the holder necessarily any better or worse than the non-commissioned ENGINEERS.

[Airborne Aircrew]

It's a bit like the cooks in the mess getting called chefs, they are NOT chefs but cooks.

Wrong... They are ration assassins... Chefs can cook... :E

[Jayand]

I knew this would cause consternation, you can call anyone what you want including using the name Engineer, but a name does not mean you are one.
You may work in Engineering as I do but unless you hold an Engineering degree you are not strictly an Engineer.
Look to the real world and Industry, the Engineers you talk of within the service would almost all be considered as Technicians. Engineering Officers would not get a job (lol) Engo's are better suited to project management imo.
Engineer jobs in the real world require you to have an Engineering degree.

[BEagle]

There is a direct Gov e-petition to protect the title 'Engineer' available at Make 'Engineer' a protected title - e-petitions (http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/6271)

Once I cudn't even spell Inginurr, now I are one!

[mad_jock]

Has the term Artificers gone out of fashion?

It to me not only gave an ability to seperate the practical from the design but also gave a title to a skill which those that have it have every reason to be proud of.

[charliegolf]

According to the wording of that e-petition, even crewmen when 'retired from the profession' will be able to call themselves engineers. Win-win!

CG (Engineer, apparently.)

[Gene Genie]

Old Fella

Your post reminds me that many of them can work out the square root to a jar of pickles, but cannot get the lid off...

Back to the thread. I've met many 'empowered' MAcr that can give the best commissioned Rearcrew Ldr a run for their money, and many who I wouldn't trust to write a sick note for my son never mind an SJAR. But that works for the commissioned lot too, it's horses for courses I guess.

Sadly, in the current climate, it's irrelevant this year anyway as there is no commissioning requirement.

Regards

Gene

[xenolith]

NutLoose & Oldfella.

Firstly, ENGINEERS There is absolutely no need to shout!

Secondly, my comments based on the RAF career structure and therefore

I know / knew Engineers in the RAF that hold licences and degrees but are not commissioned
does not hold water. May I direct you to:
http://www.raf.mod.uk/careers/jobs/technicalandengineering.cfm (http://www.raf.mod.uk/careers/jobs/technicalandengineering.cfm):ok:

It would seem to the casual observer that you both have issues with professional standing, name wise, and with your (ex) superior officers i.e. commissioned ones. That is entirely your affair so I won’t even mention chips on shoulders etc.;)

What you may not know, when berating said superior officers about not getting their hands dirty at the ‘coal face’, is that commissioned ALMs were recruited exclusively from the SNCO cadre and were not direct entry commissions. As I remember the most reviled ALM officers were the ones that entered by the ‘back door’ i.e. commissioning outside the branch because they didn’t measure up in the ALM competition and then sneaking back into the branch thereby stealing a place on the next competition.:yuk:

[St Johns Wort]

The Balloonist

A woman in a hot air balloon realised she was lost.
She reduced altitude and spotted a man below. She descended a bit more and shouted: 'Excuse me, can you help me? I promised a friend I would meet him an hour ago but I don't know where I am..'
The man below replied, 'You're in a hot air balloon hovering approximately 30 feet above the ground. You're between 40 and 41 degrees north latitude and between 59 and 60 degrees west longitude.'
'You must be an Engineer,' said the balloonist.
'I am,' replied the man, 'how did you know?'
'Well,' answered the balloonist, 'everything you have told me is probably technically correct, but I've no idea what to make of your information and the fact is, I'm still lost. Frankly, you've not been much help at all. If anything, you've delayed my trip by your talk.'
The man below responded, 'You must be in Management.'
'I am,' replied the balloonist, 'but how did you know?'
'Well,' said the man, 'you don't know where you are or where you're going. You have risen to where you are, due to a large quantity of hot air. You made a promise, which you've no idea how to keep, and you expect people beneath you to solve your problems. The fact is you are in exactly the same position you were in before we met, but now, somehow, it's my ****ing fault.

[Could be the last?]

I wondered when it would come!

:D

[herkman]

The RAAF after the war decided that crewman such as Gunners, flight engineers etc would not be able to progress past WO and remain in their mustering. The strange thing is this happened when our chief was a private who worked his way up in the ranks. Even though all aircrew positions could and were officers.

Those who did not like this move were invited to move on. We could debate the merits of this change, what it did do was deprive the RAAF of some really good people who had outstanding leadership values.

If you were General duties such as pilots or navigators then you again were invited to become an officer and if no invitation was extended then in due course you were discharged.

It seemed to me that it was a deliberate move to keep what could be top jobs for the officers.

When the RAAF started operating the C130 a problem arrived in that the flight engineers who had served on Liberators and Catalinas continued to wear their WW2 brevet but those who were newly trained recieved nothing. Many of the Loadmasters were ex WW2 signals people who continued to wear their old bevets which had nothing to do with their current role. They did not hang around long and by 1965 all had gone.

There was a need to convert the FE badge to Queens crown and to develope
the loadmaster brevet, all seemed to take a long time and they were eventually issued I believe in 1964. However neither of these positions were general duties which stopped promotion past WO.

So out of 34 crews that the RAAF had we only were established for two WO's and two F/SGT which certainly cut back career prospects.

It was only in the late 70's that FE and LM became a proper mustering and I believe that in the 80's one could be promoted up to WO.

So from 1969 through to the 80's hundreds of men left, what a waste of talent and training.

There are people from these two groups who have been given officer status but they have to come off flying and find another path to follow.

During WW2 we had an equally stupid situation where and aircraft could be commanded by a LAC and the gunner was a Flt/Lt.

Looking at the RAF today whilst not as restrictive as the RAAF it is still very hard for NCO's to climb the ranks.

Makes me sad to see that good people are being held back

Regards

Col

[NutLoose]

Nutloose

Secondly, my comments based on the RAF career structure and therefore
Quote:
I know / knew Engineers in the RAF that hold licences and degrees but are not commissioned
does not hold water. May I direct you to:
Engineering and technical - Engineering and technical careers - RAF Careers (http://www.raf.mod.uk/careers/jobs/technicalandengineering.cfm)

It would seem to the casual observer that you both have issues with professional standing, name wise, and with your (ex) superior officers i.e. commissioned ones. That is entirely your affair so I won’t even mention chips on shoulders etc.



No chip here, just stating facts as I saw and see them, i was simply trying to put across that just because one holds a Commision means nothing when It comes to knowledge and professionalism, you can have good and bad in all ranks, to say because a person is commissioned that they are better is simply not the case. The link you gave me simply refers to required qualifications to enter the RAF, a lot of Serving Engineers take their LAE licences or do degree courses etc whilst serving in the RAF, a sensible choice as it increases your employability upon leaving the RAF, but the RAF seem poor at recognising this and pushing them up the ladder.

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Looking at the RAF today whilst not as restrictive as the RAAF it is still very hard for NCO's to climb the ranks.

Makes me sad to see that good people are being held back

Regards

Col

Col,

In the nicest possible way the old adage of "should have done better at school" really does explain an awful lot.

Add to that that whatever your specialty if you are not in possession of Two Wings on your jumper you will never be in charge, you will simply always answer to someone who does have Two Wings on his jumper, and the use of "his" is quite deliberate :ok:

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

As I remember the most reviled ALM officers were the ones that entered by the ‘back door’ i.e. commissioning outside the branch because they didn’t measure up in the ALM competition and then sneaking back into the branch thereby stealing a place on the next competition.:yuk:

Names, we need names :E

[Two's in]

...just because one holds a Commision means nothing when It comes to knowledge and professionalism, you can have good and bad in all ranks, to say because a person is commissioned that they are better is simply not the case.

Not so much "better" as quallified to lead. We all know the examples where Officers are followed only out of a sense of curiousity, but in general, those selected for a commission have passed, or been assessed as, having the personal qualities and attributes required to lead. Service training reinforces and develops those skills, but the individual needs to demonstrate they have the potential in the first place.

As to your point about knowledge and professionalism, a good Officer will always recognise where to go for detailed or specialist knowledge to support a broader decision, and that is usually the tradesman and technicians performing the tasks on a daily basis.

So not so much better, just taking a different view of the issues.

[Roger the cabin boy]

Lots of good comments here amongst the usual dross - I was particularly interested in the RAAF experience.

There are several commissioned ALMs at Odiham/Benson who have done quite well over the years - I think the COS at Benson and an Acting sqn Boss at Odiham are Loadies, so they can't all be bad. That said, I have had some shocking Crewman Ldrs, but not all and not for a long time.

Empowered Masters was always a crock. But I don't think the blame for the outcome of the AASS in 02/03 is entirely at the feet of the Officers - I know that at least one MAcr on that study had made it his mission to chin off ALM Ldrs - not sure why, although I could guess.

The comment about the 2-winged master race is entirely correct; we will always answer to them, and quite rightly so I suppose. But that doesn't mean that there are not dozens of guys and gals in the NCA ranks who would make excellent officers at SO3, SO2 and SO1 level. Not sure if they could/should/want to progress further mind. But I believe that the option should be there. How many good guys have we "lost" to Flt Ops, Admin Ed, Supply etc over the years?

[NutLoose]

Not so much "better" as quallified to lead. We all know the examples where Officers are followed only out of a sense of curiousity, but in general, those selected for a commission have passed, or been assessed as, having the personal qualities and attributes required to lead. Service training reinforces and develops those skills, but the individual needs to demonstrate they have the potential in the first place.

As to your point about knowledge and professionalism, a good Officer will always recognise where to go for detailed or specialist knowledge to support a broader decision, and that is usually the tradesman and technicians performing the tasks on a daily basis.

So not so much better, just taking a different view of the issues.

I see where you are coming from, but in the same context the RAF used to employ NCO Pilots, indeed I used to know one of the last flying, so the "having the personal qualities and attributes required to lead" and "Not so much "better" as quallified to lead" still applies to all ranks and simply holding a commission does not really make much difference, I believe they only ended the NCO pilot in the RAF when Nukes came into the equation, but Teeny Weeny Airways I believe still employ NCO Pilots.

[Two's in]

NutLoose,

We seem to go around the "Officers vs Men" buoy quite regularly, and the AAC's use of NCO pilots illustrates one aspect of that wider discussion.

a good Officer will always recognise where to go for detailed or specialist knowledge to support a broader decision

Flying an aircraft is the ultimate example of detailed or specialist knowledge. Assuming you can pass the 'pat your head and rub your tummy test", it's just another specialist course to pass. The fact that the RAF choose to combine that with its Officer assessment is probably historic from the nuke era, but the system seems to work. But just because it works doesn't mean that aircrew always need any great leadership abilities, and I would argue that CRM is not leadership, almost the opposite in fact. The AAC see the value of having a career option where relatively young and very incentivised NCO's can undertake highly specialized training in order to operate the Army's aircraft - without the need to commission everyone. That approach also seems to work very well for them.

Back to the thread (!) you would need to understand how Crewman Leaders would benefit from being commissioned to make a decision about wether it's a good idea or not. What day to day tasks require a leadership component as well as specialist knowledge. Maybe somebody knows.

[TheWizard]

It's not about ability, it's about representation!!
As someone already mentioned, if you wanted to be included in decisions at Exec level then being MACr usually didn't work. S03/SO2 on the other hand.....

[Q-SKI]

Good to see that we are getting back to the thread, after all it's about our branch and our people. Dare I say that percentage wise that there are/were probably as many good or bad Masters as there were commissioned Leaders, over to you, tail clear!:hmm:

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

It's not about ability, it's about representation!!
As someone already mentioned, if you wanted to be included in decisions at Exec level then being MACr usually didn't work. S03/SO2 on the other hand.....

There is a world of differance between "involved in" and "making" when it comes to decisions and, please be assured there is no bile or chips involved in the following, it will always be the man with 2 wings who will make the decision :ok:

[Yozzer]

it will always be the man with 2 wings who will make the decision
So if a Captain with a can-do attitude wished to carry dangerous goods on board the aircraft in which you were operating you would let him make that decision and accept it.

....and you would allow a decision that you know to be wrong / unfair / bullying / illegal to proceed without challenge. You would fly with a pilot you believe to be intoxicated because he is a pilot.

Actually we live in a world were every boss has a boss to whom he/she must answer to. .....and a coroner.

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Actually we live in a world were every boss has a boss to whom he/she must answer to. .....

Actually we are in the military and in the Light Blue variety the boss to whom we all answer is a he with 2 wings :ok:

[isaneng]

I suspect most of us are agreed that there is no requirement for a commissioned officer to run a squadron section, certainly not when based on numbers and the routine admin involved. As for representation, the involvement at squadron level has, (purely in my personal experience), been more based on ability/character/personality than rank. Whilst I may be an interloper from another NCA trade, the basic requirements remain the same. However the SO3 level involvement is surely a necessary stepping stone for promotion, and it is the more senior officers that will then have the duty to represent the trade at PMA and to fight the case for numbers, pay banding etc etc. By the nature of their normal duties, MAcr tend to be limited in their variety of work experience. I mean this with no disrespect, but changing aircraft type or the odd O.O.A detachment does not gain the exposure to 'bigger picture' that tends to be available to commissioned posts. As the only mainstream NCA trade with an ongoing long term role, I would have thought that the ALM/Crewman fraternity would seek to nurture the (infrequent) commissioning opportunities that are open to them. Now as for choosing suitable candidates.............

[Old Fella]

This discussion seems to have some who pre-suppose that only those with a Commission can lead. In any particular field of endeavour the best "tradesman" may not be the best to lead. I know any number of people who were expert in their field but who could never be given the responsibility of "Leadership" and some were commissioned and some were not. I have never fathomed why a pilot or navigator should have to hold a commission whilst the flight engineer and loadmaster could not. That said, not everyone seeks to be commissioned. In my case when it was suggested that I might accept a commission, which would necessitate going off flying and becoming an Engineering Officer, I politely declined. By dint of being a military service we all understand that the rank structure dictates that we follow the leader. Sometimes we do so with reservations, sometimes we do so with complete trust and confidence. Some of us even had the temerity to voice our concern when our "Leader" was seen to be putting our backside in undue peril. It is all water under the bridge for me but I still believe there is no good reason for the system which is in place.

[Q-SKI]

Having been out in "the real world" for the last 7 years, I have also seen the travesty of when someone who has been good at their job being promoted to management level and making a complete horlicks of it. Come on guys, surely it's not about the position, it's about the quality of the individual.:hmm:

[Door Slider]

Whilst the ability to commission in branch as a crewman has temporarily ceased, I believe starting it back up again once the nav branch naturally dies in years to come will benefit the career stream for high calibre rear crew whilst assisting the RAF fill many of the SO3/2 jobs left behind.

As for it always being the 2 wing master race making the key decisions I'm sure that will always be the case at the highest level and rightfully too, however at station level I'm sure the COS at Benson would disagree!

Unfortunately the RAF don't seem to want to develope 'leaders' there seems to be far too much emphasis on 'management' for my me.

[globefan]

For my money Isaneng and Q-Ski are bang on. We need to move away from the protectionism issues exhibited by MAcr and focus on the longer term aspiration of nurturing WSO (Cmn) through to SO2 level (and beyond?). This will allow proper and sustainable representation for the cadre at the higher levels which, as already stated, cannot be achieved at MAcr rank, however much that hurts egos. However, to achieve this a number of factors need to come together. Firstly, the system needs to select the right individuals. Certainly wasn't always the case in years gone by. More recently - has the ratio between good and bad improved? I guess we all have an opinion on that. Secondly, a clear path for JOs to advance along to achieve SO2 (as a minimum) needs to be thrashed out, and I mean outside of the traditional ldr role. Like it or not the system has enough MAcr to fill those posts. Where else can the service get something back for throwing PAS at all and sundry in the early years? The onus lies with the hierarchy on all the Sqns - they need to wake up and realise that if there is a requirement to have Commissioned representation at the higher levels then they need to be developed over a number of years. Those already at that rank will not be around for ever, and the building blocks therefore need to be in place for the future. As an aside those at SO2 should be helping the new breed not pulling the trapdoor up behind them!

[NutLoose]

With the two winged Captain being the decision maker as said here, didn't the Nimod not have the position in which the pilot was not necessarily the Captain of the aircraft?