Squadron 'Uncles'

[Lima Juliet]

I see that the reserve are advertising for Squadron 'Uncles' for Typhoon Squadrons - RAF Reserves - FTRS Vacancies List (http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafreserves/whoweare/ftrsvacancieslist.cfm?storyid=DE31F001-5056-A318-A87266F0C74FC8AF&opener=main)

I think the Squadron Uncle is a great scheme and I remember the great Furze Lloyd taking this role on during the 90s. If only I lived near Lossie/Leuchars! :{

BTW - for the Loadies, a Squadron 'Uncle' is different to a Squadron 'Auntie' which is an entirely different thing! :E

Any takers?

LJ

[just another jocky]

Never heard of a Sqn Uncle before.

Looking at the job spec though, sounds more like a Gofer than anything else. :confused:

Typical duties may include assisting the Sqn Executive Officer with Ops and Planning tasks.

Exposure to sqn support functions and reports/returns (such as AFT & CFT compilation, SAPPHIRE, F540 etc).

[airpolice]

Three reasons why recruitment may be harder than for some other jobs.

Of particular note is reference to the ‘Effect of Re-employment on Commutation’.

Reserve personnel are required to maintain currency in CCS and RAF Fitness. The successful applicants will be expected to undertake CCS and RAF Fitness during their probationary period.

And of course, no flying pay.

[Wander00]

Is that "Uncle" as in the Adj in "Aces high"

[Party Animal]

airpolice,

Several good reasons not to sign up but it could suit a 55 year old newly retired aircrew bod living locally, that has no idea what to do in life for the next 5 years. On the understanding that FTRS posts run till age 60.

Interesting that new jobs are still being created though in this era of cuts, slash, cuts, burn and more cuts everywhere else.

[Onceapilot]

Each to his own. Full-time holding Officer:uhoh:.

OAP

[snippy]

"Three reasons why recruitment may be harder than for some other jobs."

Agree loss of flying pay might be one, But I completely disagree with the other two. I am a 51 year old FTRS who has eased through his latest fitness test and recently completed CCS (it's not how it used to be by a long shot).

[Wander00]

Furze Lloyd - now there was a guy. Did I hear that sadly he had died before his time?

[BEagle]

I find this concept of squadron consiglieri quite astonishing.

Is the RAF really so understrength that it cannot meet these requirements from within conventional manning sources?

[Chugalug2]

Would it not be a good idea to seek Dutch ones while they're at it?

[The Helpful Stacker]

Squadron 'Uncle'? Sounds a bit Yewtree to me.....

[spekesoftly]

Would it not be a good idea to seek Dutch ones while they're at it?

Only if properly dressed, complete with Dutch cap.

[dragartist]

Or an Indian Auntie

[Biggus]

In these financially constrained times, maybe what they really need is a ......

Sugar Daddy!

[NutLoose]

Or perhaps, "Punka Wallah", all waft and no luft. Wouldn't the job fall under the remit of the FOO mentioned elsewhere?

[Wallah]

NutLoose,

It used to, certainly there were posts on 3(F) and 11 called OC Mission Support Flight that looked after Ops, Int and Admin (plus visits, bogs and drains, F540, AFT/CFT etc). These were deployable posts and created to replace the old Harrier Sqn "Uncles" (certainly on 3(F) anyway). Not sure if they are binning the OC MSF post and going back to the "Uncle" concept or keeping the OC MSFs and effectively duplicating 90% of the post.

[tailchase]

Not sure why so restrictive as no flying involved and more of an extra exec level post to do all of the tasks that the old uncle posts did. Half of the jobs they do will prob require more broadened experience than they perhaps envisage.

[Wallah]

My guess is so they can be an Auth and Duty Exec, which were the only things OC MSF couldn't do.

[airpolice]

Tailchase, it's probably about the fact that the aircrew omnt he squadrons concerned will be Pilots only. I don't see an ex nav mentoring a newbie typhoon driver.

Party Animal, I was thinking that repaying your lump sum might put recent;y retired people off.

[LadyWhyatt]

In response to the question from Wanderl00, I am sorry to confirm that my Dad, Furz, passed away in 2010 after a long battle against multiple injuries after a major car accident the year before.

He loved his time as a sqn uncle - he was a great mentor, source of support & mine of information to them, as well as wearing a groove in the counter of the bar.

I stayed one night after being marooned by East Coast trains at Grantham - seeing the affection that the sqn & other mess members had for him was great - his calling card of 'my dear chap' ringing out as we entered the bar.

I miss him so.

[Wander00]

Lady Wyatt - I was an former pilot, returned to the RAF as an administrator after 11 years as a civvie (and TA), and was posted to Binbrook. Your Dad was one of the first Lightning pilots I met there, and over a period of more than 2 years was avgreat help and support - one of the loveliest of men. You should be, and I am sure are, very proud of him.

[Party Animal]

I was thinking that repaying your lump sum might put recent;y retired people off


Sorry airpolice, I am unfamiliar with the FTRS set up. Are you saying that if I retired at 55 with my lump sum and pension and then joined back up as FTRS until aged 60, I would have to pay back my entire lump sum? :hmm:

[just another jocky]

Sorry airpolice, I am unfamiliar with the FTRS set up. Are you saying that if I retired at 55 with my lump sum and pension and then joined back up as FTRS until aged 60, I would have to pay back my entire lump sum?

No, that doesn't happen, it's only if you PVR that you would have to pay the EDP back if you wanted to go FTRS immediately.

[1.3VStall]

Lady W,

I, too, knew your Dad over many years. When you wrote the phrase "my dear chap" many fine memories flooded back. Furz was indeed a splendid fellow - you can be justifiably proud of who he was and what he achieved.

[newt]

I think we all do LW. He is still oft talked about in 92 Squadron circles. A great guy. Best wishes from his old mate Newt

[airpolice]

Not only do you have to repay some (most) of your lump, if you join ftrs within a year (or possibly two) but they take into account what "they" are paying you in pension and deduct that from the pay for the new job.

So don't go thinking that you can retire, spend the lump and live off the monthly money, then get a job at the same pay as you were on before, that's not how it works.

[Wander00]

AP - I wonder why?

[Lima Juliet]

Airpolice

That is a very misleading post!

If you are on AFPS75 you can keep your lump sum whenever you have left.

If you are on AFPS05 you have some tricky sums to work out depending on when you left - try googling "AFPS 05 remployment" and look for an MMP document in PDF.

As for you cannot get a job at the same pay as as before - yes you can! What you can't do is earn more with your salary and pension combined. If you were a Flt Lt and became a Sqn Ldr then you would have all your pension abated, but you would still be paid the FULL Sqn Ldr wage, regardless of what you were paid before.

Lady W, +1 on your old man - he was a top bloke and I will forever have a kind thought for him in my mind. Such a sad loss and I hope he is at the gates with St Peter and welcomes me with a hand shake and "My dear chap!".

LJ

MMP here http://www.raf.mod.uk/community/getmedia/downloader.cfm?file=6739A02A-5056-A30A-09662EFFE6F3C308

[Biggus]

If I have this correct, lets look at the example of someone who retires at 55 on AFPS05 conditions. Let's say their pension is 50% of their final salary.

Give it the necessary month or more, and they rejoin as FTRS. They revert to the salary they were on before. So, compared to staying retired, or getting a second job, they are now working a 40+ hr week for only effectively an extra half the salary they were on before. For example.


Final salary £70,000

Pension £35,000



Option 1 - Retired:

0 hrs worked
£35,000 income
Options for second career, possible part time work, increased family and leisure time, etc

Option 2 - Rejoin as FTRS:

40+ hrs worked
£70,000 income



When you look at things like NI, higher rate tax brackets, etc, going back to work as FTRS probably means you actually only increase your net take home pay by about a third.

I would suggest in this scenario you would have to really love the job to go the FTRS route!

[airpolice]

Effect on EDP Lump Sum
If you rejoin the Regular Armed
Forces voluntarily or accept an FTRS
appointment without a break of at
least the period represented by the
EDP lump sum you will have to pay
back the ‘unexpired’ proportion. This
means that if your EDP lump sum
was of equivalent value to 12 months’
pay, and you rejoined the Armed
Forces after six months, you would
have to pay back half of the lump sum.

Not good if you have spent the lump and then decide to take up the FTRS job.

you should also be aware of th edifferent "status" of FTRS terms of service: No quarter, no family medical etc. It's not like joining again, it's actually more like working in a different air force, except you still get dicked for sec duties and sdo and guard commander and whatever else comes your way.

Basically, in the previous example;

Retire and have £35,000 a year, then take a £40,000 a year job with Tesco, who will pay you, and keep your pension & lump sum, OR

Pay back a chunk of your lump sum, take up an FTRS post, and they use the pension payment (that you were already getting) to pay you for working.

[Biggus]

Once again using the example figures I used in my previous post....

Given that you don't pay NI on a pension, then a pension of £35,000 actually represents the take home pay of a salary of £39,800 (lets call it £40k to make life easy).

Therefore, a 55 year old retiree on a £35,000 pension would only need to find a job paying £30,000 to have the same take home pay as they would if they rejoined as FTRS on £70,000.

This might not be possible, or they might not want to work that hard, but even a part time or low paid job pulling in £15-20k would mean very little drop in life style. Indeed, as I said before, given the upper tax band effect and not paying NI, doing nothing and retiring permanently would result in a drop in take home pay of nearer a third than a half.

In summary, I think it highly unlikely that many 55 year olds will consider rejoining as FTRS. It simply doesn't make sense, there is very little financial incentive.

I did know an ex Wg Cdr and ex Gp Capt who rejoined as FTRS Flt Lts. They were both younger than 55, one considerably so. Here the numbers would be very different, and I'm sure it made financial sense. However, one of the biggest draws for both of them was that they returned to flying and Sqn life.

The FTRS Sqn uncle posts under discussion are non flying posts.

[just another jocky]

Wow, you guys are very negative about the FTRS deal. There are plenty of benefits, but you seem hell bent on only pointing out the negative ones and being quite misleading about some of the effects. Perhaps it depends upon the job you do as FTRS?


I know of several FTRS pilots who are more than happy flying and not vegetating at home. They get to keep fit (fitness tests), they DO get HTD, they get paid to fly, have Dining-In Nights, no SDO, certainly no Guard Commander (where did that come from?), sqn camaraderie, expeds etc etc.


Or they could be working at Tesco's. Hmmm, let me consider that for a minute.


It may not suit you guys but it certainly suits others.

[Biggus]

As I've just said, the Sqn Uncle posts under discussion are non flying roles, and I'm fully aware that some people would welcome the chance to continue flying, or start again!


As for Dining-In nights, Sqn camaraderie, expeds, etc - while all a bonus, one has to consider how effective a retention/recruitment pull they really are, given:

http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/530243-aircrew-sustainability.html



Regarding retirement, it doesn't have to equate to "vegetating at home". Whether you spend your retirement doing that, or instead enjoy yourself doing whatever floats your boat, is in your own hands.

You also obviously have no idea of what goes on in the back of a Tesco's store! :ok::ok:
































I made the last bit up!! ;)

But you would get a discount on your groceries!! ;)

[Party Animal]

Yep - FTRS obviously works for many people, particularly if they can fly and live close to work etc...

However, the Aircrew Sustainability note suggests that Manning are going to create a whole load more FTRS slots across the board. If a 55 year old 'bean stealer' living in the mess at High Wycombe or Northwood suddenly has to start paying to do so, then it will be interesting to see who fills the posts.

Progress or desperation?

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

I suspect that the initial idea was seen as progress, but by the time the accountants had structured the package it looks like desperation.

[just another jocky]

Ah Biggus, methinks you posted as I was typing, and I absolutely agree with this..... Regarding retirement, it doesn't have to equate to "vegetating at home". Whether you spend your retirement doing that, or instead enjoy yourself doing whatever floats your boat, is in your own hands.


I love flying, which is why I've not had a ground tour in over 20 years and didn't go the promotion route and I don't relish the thought of not flying when I reach 55yo, so I guess I will be making the quite obviously poor financial decision to apply for a FTRS flying job in a few years time.


As you say.....whatever floats your boat.

[Daf Hucker]

I've just signed on for a 3 year FTRS contract after retiring at 55. I'm not doing it for the financial gain, I'm doing it because I can continue to do a job that I love, with a great group of people.

Not everything is defined by ££££'s.

[tailchase]

HTD - always told it isn't payable to FTRS -something to do with no upheaval such as posting/relocation.

No SDO? Must mean someone else is covering then as that could only be a local management call!

[just another jocky]

tailchase - it IS claimable, several mates at work successfully argued the point and won and the SDO is a local thing.


why wont smilies work?

[Biggus]

Daf H,

Good for you, but I would suggest that for many, "love of the job" only goes so far:

http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/530243-aircrew-sustainability.html

http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/520912-retention.html



The very fact that there is FTRS flying slot available for you to apply for is an indication that many don't feel the way you do!

[Pontius Navigator]

FTRS is also pensionable. So, apart from creating work for idle hands it eventually gives a useful increase in pension too.

[vascodegama]

JAJ

It is more basic than that H2D for FTRS came in with JPA, it is in JSP 752 under the who is entitled bit. It is so black and white even a bluntly could see.If there are FTRS chap(ess)s who are not getting it paid I suggest that they put in a retrospective claim, that should help OC Admin's blood pressure!:ok:

[Lima Juliet]

I'd be interested to know where it says you can have HDT as FTRS? Unless you are a very unusual 'Full Commitment' reservist or live in Central London...


Here is a quote straight from JSP752 (latest version 2012)
f. FTRS (Limited Commitment) (FTRS(LC)), FTRS (Home Commitment), FTRS(HC)), Sponsored Reserves, Additional Duties Commitment (ADC) and FTRS (LC) Reserve Staff Group personnel are ineligible for HDT, but may exceptionally become eligible when authorised by the SPVA PACCC

LJ

[Lima Juliet]

PS. Plus you have to do CCS, RAFFT and SDE/SDO/OO etc... as detailed by the chain of command...

[just another jocky]

Nevertheless Leon, at least 2 FTRS at my work are claiming for home to work travel.


As for the rest, as has been said, each to their own.

[WhiteOvies]

I had never met a Sqn uncle before I joined 20(R) and so Furze was the only example I had to go on. A true gentlemen, he did a superb, if somewhat undefined, job of looking after everyone on the Sqn from top to bottom.

If every Uncle is like Furze then I would suggest that every Sqn should have one!

[SirToppamHat]

A note has recently been released insisting that accommodation can be made available 'at entitled rates' for FTRS subject to certain conditions, chief amongst which is that the post has to have been advertised unsuccessfully several times before this can be applied for. As with almost all things to do with the reserve forces, the entitlement is unclear and needs to be approved (if memory serves) at 2* level. It also assumes that there is 'surplus' accommodation available - something which will become a real problem as more people take this up because, if I read the note correctly, this only applies to SLA (ie not SFA), so will see messes used as hotels by the shift workers or those working week days travelling to their real homes over the weekends.

The other thing about FTRS is just how difficult it is to justify having someone in uniform to do it - there is an agreement between MOD (RAF?) and the unions that these posts will only be created where there is a 'legal requirement' for the postholder to be a member of the Armed Forces. Some examples include flying instructors and ATCOs, neither of whom are required to hold civilian licenses so long as they are members of the Reserve. I am surprised that the sqns concerned have managed to get this past the TUs, but good on them if they have.

Edited to add:

I guess it may be different if the existing post-holder is in uniform and it's a conversion from regular to reserve service, otherwise I would be surprised that the unions hadn't fought it.

[Lima Juliet]

STH - which Unions are you refering to?

[SirToppamHat]

Leon Jabachjabicz

Check Your PMs

STH

[Lima Juliet]

Just to clarify from STH's post.

There have been difficulties with changing some RO, AVO and RAF (Civilian Component) (RAF(CC)) posts as they are paid via the Civil Service and as they are feeling the squeeze of redundancies then the Unions need convincing that the job has to be done by someone in uniform. In the case of new posts, like this Sqn Uncle, that is not the case as it is a new post generated for the military by the military via an EAF.

As I am free to have an opinion in this great country of ours - frickin' Unions, I'm sick to death of Unions. Can't we get rid of them and come up with a better method of employee representation in the 21st Century?? Surely, we are past the days of the Tolpuddle Marchers? :mad:

LJ

[tailchase]

And what about Stn Ops, or whatever they have called themselves these days?

Think about a flying sqn as a wing just as Admin/Eng etc - the sqns have their own staff through the Admin/Eng/Ops chain to do their own work whereas Stn Ops as a wing of its own keeps the airfield and station functions going that the Sqns need to fly - they are not sqn gophers albeit certain people in green seem to try it on sometimes from my past experience.

[Lima Juliet]

Now jobs at Coningsby...

RAF Reserves - FTRS Vacancies List (http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafreserves/whoweare/ftrsvacancieslist.cfm?storyid=B33A83B8-5056-A318-A84B6645D58CFAFC&opener=main)

Just need a Typhoon Sqn at Northolt!

LJ

[Biggus]

Why does the FTRS Vacancies List that the link takes you to say "2 x Sqn Ldrs (Fast Jet Pilots)" when the criteria then listed are:

Essential - ......Sqn Ldr or Flt Lt aircrew.....

Desirable - .... recent experience working on a flying station (FJ, RW or ME)


It would appear that:

a) You don't have to be a pilot

b) If you are a pilot, you don't have to be FJ :confused:




Alternatively, someone is not very good at writing job requirements, which is a distinct possibility when you consider that throughout the first few lines "squadron" is abbreviated as "sqn" as frequently as "Sqn", "Squadron Leader" is abbreviated as "sqn ldr", etc ........

[Wallah]

Pity, there goes another 2 x Sqn Ldr Flight Ops posts by the looks of it. The specialization is slowly being nibbled away.

[tailchase]

Wallah - Pity, there goes another 2 x Sqn Ldr Flight Ops posts by the looks of it. The specialization is slowly being nibbled away


Was it really ever given anything solid to work on anyway? Most of the good posts still Ops Spt (Any) but filled by FC or ATC with better career aspirations due to bigger footprint. Seen it in practice.

[CoffmanStarter]

Looks like LUAS are recruiting for a F/L FTRS(LC) as Deputy OC and QFI

RAF Reserves FB/P: (http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafreserves/whoweare/ftrsvacancieslist.cfm?storyid=0B809012-5056-A318-A83EB0DEBFDE9AD5&opener=main)

[Biggus]

Interesting to see according to the advert for the LUAS Deputy OC and CFI that it's not essential to already be a pilot, merely "desirable" ...... :ugh:

Presumably if you aren't already one they'll teach you...? :{

[Uncle Ginsters]

Can anyone explain the requirement for FTRS QFIs?

With the extremely limited amount of QFI posts in the Service, surely it is essential that we cycle as many young, full-time pilots through them and back to the frontline?

I find it beyond belief that we still seem to foster a culture whereby quite a number can stay in 22 Gp for a long, long time whilst watching instructional experience and understanding on the frontline diminish.

[BEagle]

Can anyone explain the requirement for FTRS QFIs?



If there was an urgent need to fill the front line by calling back UAS QFIs (as there was in 1990 pre-GW1), it might make sense to back-fill with reservists, should any be available...

But since the lunatic Marston report :yuk: and the subsequent wholescale dumbing-down of the UAS scheme to the level of some glorified air cadet scheme, the reverse is true. You will note that the scouser UAS advert refers to 'the' QFI - as in the only one - required to work a 45-50 hour week, plus all the associated niff-naff and triv., including CCS anf RAFFT. No doubt the 'range of secondary duties' includes sticking a broom up ones ar$e and sweeping the crewroom floor?

They really couldn't have made the advert sound less appealing if they'd tried.

:hmm:

[just another jocky]

.....and the subsequent wholescale dumbing-down of the UAS scheme to the level of some glorified air cadet scheme.....

I assume you are referring to the transfer of the EFT course from UAS and back to a full-time, post-IOT course. It may have caused a change to the UAS experience, but IMO it was a good decision. The UAS students that want to fly, do (same course as before, just not scored) and the money paid for the flying training goes to those, full-time officers who have proved their commitment and joined up. As they are full-time, they focus fully on the course and don't spend half of each sortie revising what they were taught on the previous sortie. :rolleyes:

If you weren't, then I'll dismount from my horsey. :O

I suspect there will be more adverts for FTRS on UAS's this year.......:ooh:

[Wallah]

Tailchase,

You are right, I think the future of the Flight Ops specialization is on very thin ice and heading for a slow and painful demise. My gut feeling is, that after years of neglect and blatant indifference, is that it will be subsumed into the wider Ops Spt branch. This will be a real pity, as despite it's rocky start, there are some very talented people people out there doing a bloody good job who will never get the recognition or the jobs they deserve.

Our only saving grace is that we are cheap to train; though I would hate to see us revert to the days of being the dumping ground for anyone who gets chopped from Pilot/ATC/ABM etc with no "new blood" straight from Cranwell.

[CoffmanStarter]

3FTS UBAS and 115(R) @ RAFC also recruiting for RAFR F/L QFI's

FTRS Vacancies List (http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafreserves/whoweare/ftrsvacancieslist.cfm)

It would also appear OASC are looking for a couple of RAFR F/L's as Boarding Officers

[just another jocky]

3FTS UBAS and 115(R) @ RAFC also recruiting for RAFR F/L QFI's


There will be more. ;)

[CoffmanStarter]

Cheers JAJ ... It's quite interesting to see what's on the RAFR VL against F/L and S/L ...

[Just This Once...]

Seems to be the plan.

Stage 1 is to pull as many QFIs into FTRS as possible from the cadre already qualified to save money and avoid the manning cap.

Stage 2 is to wonder why you have very few QFIs available for the frontline requirement.

Stage 3 is for the FTRS cadre to leave through natural wastage.

Stage 4 is for the system to fall on its arse whilst issuing formal denials.

Stage 5 is to wonder why we did Stage 1.

The plan is working well but as some fleets were already at Stage 4 before the start of the plan we may need to work harder on our institutional denials to allow other fleets to catch-up.

:ok: