NEM consultation.

[Al R]

Well, time to be heard.

The New Employment Model (NEM) Survey (http://surveys.defenceconsultations.org.uk/limesurvey/index.php?sid=13567&lang=en)

Some aspects of the package are extremely strong and need to be protected, such as the provision of subsidised accommodation.

Does this mean that SFA will continue to be subsidised? From the supporting documentation;


A Home Purchase Incentive (HPI) scheme should be an important element of the NEM. While we will continue to make subsidised SFA and SLA available to entitled personnel who need it, we want to make the option of home purchase more realistic for more personnel. A key component will be ensuring better access to information. We will also look at increasing the amount we can make available as an interest-free loan to support a deposit (currently through Long Service Advance of Pay). And it may be possible to give some personnel who have qualified for an Armed Forces Pension Scheme (AFPS) 05 or 15 Early Departure Payment access to those funds before they leave service.

In particular, the impact of Service life on families and on the careers of spouses and civil partners are consistently the ‘top two’ causes of dissatisfaction in the Armed Forces Continuous Attitude Survey (AFCAS). So, we must address the growing gap between what Defence offers and what our people expect.

How can a spouse establish a pension/wealth for 'the team' or for his/her own right these days? With job uncertainty and AFPS being an ever moving goal/ever declining reward, is it any wonder that partners contributions are even more vital?

RAF. News Archive, RAF News, SFA, Pay and allowances - RAF Families Federation (http://www.raf-ff.org.uk/newsarchive.asp?info=NEM+CONSULTATION+LAUNCHED++The+biggest+ change+to+RAF+in+a+generation&start=0)

[Jumping_Jack]

Encouragement to buy your own home & settle (being pushed by substantial increases in SFA rent and mediocre 'loan scheme')

Concomitant increase in the number of 'headless' service families away from base (accelerating the erosion of the service 'family')

Removal of 2 pay increments for all ranks below AVM (to save money on pay bill and pensions)

Ability for the service to make individuals redundant on 'statutory terms' outwith Redundancy schemes (classed as routine 'manning lever') below the Air ranks.

:sad:

[getsometimein]

Removal of 2 pay bands?

Looks like NCA will be even less worthwhile then.

Join at 18, probably serve to 60. 42 years service with only 3 ranks, and only 15 pay bands!

[Lima Juliet]

What's interesting is that you can fill it out as many times as you like! I wanted to add something after my first submission and ended filling it all out again with extra stuff.

It will be interesting to see what comes of all this. I understand that it is being run by KPMG who, as one of the 'Big 4', are notorious in providing those that want the consultancy in giving the answer they want (not necessarily those that are surveyed! :eek:) - allegedly, of course. :ok:

However, you never know, they might just give us all the answers we've been looking for...:cool:

[Melchett01]

That survey has cuts cuts and more cuts written through out it.

I fail to see how they can make the allowances system any cheaper given that we have moved to a largely self-service system on JPA, unless of course they plan to slash allowances.

Furthemore, there are apparently problems with the pay system. Really??? In 15 years service, the only grumbles I have ever heard about pay are 'it could be higher and I've hit top level and am marking time.' I don't know what they are planning, but that question is so loaded as to be untrue.

And it's great that you want to help people to buy houses to get off base, but what about those who already own their own homes??

To quote a chum of mine, "This is a crisis. A large crisis. In fact, if you got a moment, it's a twelve-storey crisis with a magnificent entrance hall, carpeting throughout, 24-hour portage, and an enormous sign on the roof, saying 'This Is a Large Crisis"

[junket]

Al R - yes SFA/SLA will continue to be subsidised

Jumping J - the HPI is being designed to increase choice and help to facilitate house purchase. It is not there to encourage personnel to move out of SFA/SLA. In terms of headless families; only 35% of RAF personnel currently reside in SFA now, so I cant see how this will have that much of a further impact on the 'community' life. As for the removal of a couple of pay increments, why is this much of a concern? It doesn't automatically follow that the top 2 levels will be removed so an effective cut, far from it, just that there will be fewer increment levels to get to the top levels we have now and that we may not necessarily have yearly increment rises. Perhaps this is an opportunity to start to enable an element of performance related pay progression for the top levels?

Get some time in - why should this adversely impact on NCA in the way you are referring. Note that the Defence Board have repeatedly stated that the new NEM offer is about recruitment and retention, so that is the basis in how workstrands are being delivered. Further any efficiencies being realised will be re-invested in the NEM Offer.

Deliverance - you are right the level of detail is very thin. However the RAF Roadshows through Jul/Aug will bring an enhanced level of knowledge. However, the workstrands are still work in progress so delivering loads of information is quite difficult.

Leon - the online survey is designed for multiple entries as more information becomes apparent to us we will wish to refresh what we submit. However this survey is not the only element of consultation. So you are aware KPMG are not leading the consultation, the MOD are.
KPMG IPSOS/MORI are providing trained individuals to assist with focus groups and interviews as the Services do not have the trained individuals in this regard. They also have excellent HR analytic tools (far in excess of what the MOD has) that can help with the quantitative and qualitative data analysis. Further, this consultation is being designed to be scientifically robust so the results we receive are statistically valid and reliable and not skewed by internal bias.

Melchett - I must have been doing the wrong survey as I didn't see any mention of cuts, just an opportunity for you to air basic views at this stage. Regards allowances see above to an extent, but the plan is to modernise the current allowances and make them simpler and easier for us to use. Any savings made in this regard will be reinvested in the overall NEM package. However, the allowances review will be sustained over a fair amount of time, for example overseas allowances need substantial restructure but that wont happen until the Army move from Germany for obvious reasons. In terms of the pay system, then if you were an airman then you would now all too well about the despised divisiveness of pay 2000, in partic the anomaly of high/low pay bands and the flip/flop effect on promotion. At least the 2 revised pay models that are being considered will correct these issues. And to re-iterate about HPI, it is about providing further choice, if you already have a house then it wont benefit, until you sell up and have the opportunity to buy another. The NEM cannot do everything for everyone.

I hope I haven't offended anyone with the above - it is just a quick download to try and help some commonly held misperceptions and cynicism (which I actually don't blame anyone for). However, I genuinely believe that this consultation will provide us with an opportunity to influence our offer for the better. My suggestion si to get involved where you can, keep an open mind, remember that the team who are driving this are on your side (they are predominantly military so have a vested interest to get this right), and that what the NEM is trying to do is provide an offer that is compatible not just now but for future generations.

[ALM In Waiting]

Thanks again for the info junket.
Do you have any idea what form these new pay models might take?
With a move away from high/low, how are trades with greater responsibility and length of training to be financially rewarded?
I.e the classic techie VS admin.

[Onceapilot]

Junket, did you swallow the pill in one go!?:)

OAP

[VinRouge]

Anyone suggesting going to a flat rate so we can do away with central accounts and auditing?

[junket]

ALM - Unfortunately I am not an expert on the pay aspects. From what I understand trades will go through a more thorough Whole Trade Score and Job evaluation, which should remove the Techie vs Admin debate. Probably like many I do remain slightly sceptical on this though.

In terms of the pay models I am straying into slightly unsure territory. Let me come back to you once I have read a bit more

[junket]

Deliverance - all fair points although some out of scope for NEM. Suffice make sure you get your views into the surveys and any consultation activity if you are invited to take part, it all counts.

[Lima Juliet]

Junket

Thank you for taking the time to share your knowledge and optimism. You may have noted that most of us fear something more sinister? :suspect:

In my quarter century of service I have seen too many 'this will be good for you, don't worry' schemes in the past only to see some butt-snorkelling git (http://boards.buffalobills.com/images/smilies/kma.gif) cherry pick it in order to make savings for the department and get a state award in the process.

I do hope you are right and our unfounded cynicism is proven wrong :ok:

LJ

[Corporal Clott]

NEM? I smell something...

http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j88/jakartajive/i-smell-a-rat.jpg

[Whenurhappy]

Has the NEM team got around the seemingly immovable problem presented by the Treasury when housing assistance was discussed in 2005/6, namely that once an SP had drawn public monies to buy his/her own house, any future use of SFA/SLA would be at a commercial rate on the principle of 'double dipping'?

I've mentioned it before, but DASA did some excellent work looking at housing affordability vs rank vs commuting distances to stations and then predicted - based on some pretty firm (and grim) statistics, the number of RTAs and casualties that would result from encouraging even more SP to live outside the wire. It will take a very brave (or stupid) commander to sign up to a policy that will increase the numbers of road traffic related deaths and injuries, principally amongst our lesser paid and in most cases, junior personnel.

Moreover, not only are proposals scant on detail, there is nothing, repeat nothing on how to encourage overseas service, now that LOA has been so drastically reduced and that there are no prospects of subsidising loss of spousal income (unlike, say, the FCO). Most of us who has served overseas in recent years realise that our spouses have to take a career holiday and that our disposable income plummets; moreover and in spite of CDS's edict of June 2012, overseas service is a career-killing move. Yes, it's been great to serve abroad with the RAF, in that we've had great experiences and lived in some interesting locations, but if I could turn the clock back 12 years, I would 'stay close to my desk and never go to sea, and I'll be the ruler of the Queen's Nav-eee'

[getsometimein]

Get some time in - why should this adversely impact on NCA in the way you are referring. Note that the Defence Board have repeatedly stated that the new NEM offer is about recruitment and retention.

By my reckoning, and averaging out promotions during a 42 year career, an NEM NCA would spend 9 years marking time as a Sgt, and 11 years marking time as a FS. Present this to people and in my eyes there would be a massive recruitment and retention issue.

Not to forget there is no good news about flying pay banding around...

18 - Join
20 - Sgt Level 1
24 - Sgt 5
33 - FS 1 (Promotion)
37 - FS 5
48 - MACR 1 (Promotion)
52 - MACR 5 (Max pay band)

[Door Slider]

Getsometimein,

Prior to Pay2000 we did not have an incremental pay system, it was a flat rate depending on rank, I don't recall that having an impact upon the recruitment of NCA or any other trade for that matter. How many civvy jobs have incremental pay?

The good news is, join at 18 as a Sgt, make it to MAcr and have a better pension than any other non-commissioned rank.

And it's still one of the best jobs the RAF has to offer!

[downsizer]

May not of had incremental pay, but we did have increments based on time served. And incidentally lots of jobs offer incremental pay, NHS, feds, fire etc...

[Lima Juliet]

Alternatively, ditch pay increments and give us a decent pay rise each year! You know, one that equals inflation at the very least! :ugh:

[iRaven]

LJ - that would be a pay freeze over time in real terms (using government speak!).

[dkh51250]

DASA did some excellent work looking at housing affordability vs rank vs commuting distances to stations and then predicted - based on some pretty firm (and grim) statistics, the number of RTAs and casualties that would result from encouraging even more SP to live outside the wire.

Does anybody have a link for the above please? I assume it was done as a one off report rather than the usual stats theys so excellently provide.

[gr4techie]

the number of RTAs and casualties that would result from encouraging even more SP to live outside the wire.

I'd love to know how they could possibly work this one out? They must roll some dice and make this statistic up.

[Jumping_Jack]

As this is a cost cutting exercise are you seriously saying that they wouldn't remove the top layers from the pay increments? I'm positive that NEM will not be used to increase the pay bill. :hmm:

[Whenurhappy]

GR4 and DKH,

The study carried out by DASA at Ensleigh in late 2006 was initally looking at housing affordability around the post 2013 lay-down of RAF establishments. SP were banded into broad salary groups (airmen & JNCOs, SNCOs & WOs, JOs, SOs etc) and this was mapped against the detailed housing sales data for assumed house buying patterns (ie flat, 2 brm house, 3 brm house etc).

From this 'affordability plots' were developed and overlayed on the RAF disposition. At this point the study showed the considerable distance a lot of SP would need to travel to get to work, and one of the DASA statisticians (with brains the size of Jupiter) suggested testing the hypothesis that 'the longer the commute, the greater the number of RTAs'. The commuting distances were then normalised against RTA statistics ('hard and grim') for early and late rush-hour commutes (again, normalised for seasonal variation), and from that predictions of accidents, injuries and fatalities were abstracted.

All sorts of clever confidence intervals and bell curves were applied to the data and results, with the usual cavaets, but the study showed (again, using 2000-2005 housing affrodability data) that typically more junior personnel (again normalised on age and housing types) could only afford housing at considerably greater distances from bases than the middle and senior ranks. Of course, data such as this is site-specific and many SP by ex quarters etc but the general outcome was pretty surprising!

The study was done for SPP in Air Cmd as part of work for CAS's Strategy...but I left for AFG and have no idea what happened to it, as I have not returned to HWY and never likely to!