RAF Careers office tells people "bar is being lowered" for entry.

[muppetofthenorth]

Am I right to think this is an idiotic way of presenting news about recruitment?

From a different forum, one aimed at students:
After a long period where RAF jobs seemed to be unavailable and you were more than likely to be told your chosen career was closed for application, most of the RAF branches and trades are open and in some areas the RAF is desperate to fill training slots immediately. What does this mean? Well it does mean that the bar is lowered for certain jobs and that you can expect a fast track process through the selection machine. While it does not mean that the RAF will let anyone in, you may have something that can be waived to allow your application to progress. If you are not sure, ask at your nearest AFCO rather than the Careers Information Line.

My problem is specifically the bit in bold.

How the hell do you hope to encourage high quality applicants if this is how you advertise the vacancies?

This is supposedly posted by someone working at the Leeds AFCO. Can anyone on the inside have a word?

[BEagle]

Having Googled some key words from your extract to find the original post, I found that it went on to say:

If you are looking at the following jobs, you can expect priority treatment and a better chance of success:

AEROSPACE BATTLE MANAGER
COMPUTER TECHNICIAN
HR SPECIALIST
AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLER
CATERING AND HOSPITALITY SPECIALIST
VEHICLE TECHNICIAN

Presumably, in old money that translates as:

Fighter Controller
Ground Radio Techie
God knows - but something really rather blunt
Air Trafficker
Cook
Mechanic

[Party Animal]

Surely though, the bar is moved every year for every trade, depending on the applicants to jobs ratio?

i,e, if 1,000 people apply each year to be pilots and last year, 10 were accepted as opposed to 200 needed for this year, then clearly, those applying this year will have a better chance of success. Hypothetical figures obviously.

Likewise, if for example you wanted to be a 'gunner' and nothing else, then you may have to wait 18 months for a vacancy. However, if you wanted to be a HR Specialist (Admin Clerk) or a Hospitality Specialist (Steward), then providing you have the 15 Grade A 'O' levels basic level of state education, you can start tomorrow - because the RAF is desparately short.

[aw ditor]

HR :- Human Resources/ (Personnel that was?)

[Trim Stab]

I thought HR specialist is Hormone-Replacement specialist to cater for all the transgender recruits the RAF seems keen to recruit these days.

[muppetofthenorth]

Surely though, the bar is moved every year for every trade, depending on the applicants to jobs ratio?

It is, and I have no issue with that concept. However, the way something reads when it says "the bar is being lowered" doesn't necessarily connect the dots.



And don't call me Shirley, etc.

[Yozzer]

The acute shortage I am told, is in IT Techs. In short people who fix / install computers / networks or have anything to do with computers including software. ( or should that be soft wear!)

Compare the salary and career prospects of a civilian equivelent, even civil Servants and it does not take biblical brains to work out that this is a lose-lose scenarion. Not least due to the people prepared to bite the bullet are going to be the same who would not 'make-it' in the civil sector.

Look at the other trade requirements, and all have transferable skills that are better paid outside of the military fence. Pay back time methinks from degrading the quality of life and job security that was once the mantra by which the armed forces existed.

[Haraka]

H.R.
Was at a routine morning management meeting some years ago when the usual " Human Remains" item was thankfully absent, but a strange wild-eyed peroxide blonde creature was gibbering away on a cellphone.

On being pressed , she announced that she was acting as H.R. "Locum". (:))
The meeting then went on for three times a long as normal, due to persistent irrelevant and inane questions and "input" from said individual.

Yeah ,
Sure.
P.S. And no , I wasn't chairing.

[Heathrow Harry]

"degrading the quality of life and job security that was once the mantra by which the armed forces existed."

damn!

I always thought it was defending us..................

[teeteringhead]

Harry

"the mantra by which" is not the same as "the reason for".

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

presumably HR types are being hired as we are short of live targets? :E

Bring back Personnel!!!

[racedo]

What it means is that having certain disabilities will not rule you out of certain roles i.e being blind wouldn't mean you can't be a Nav, some pilots will say it would make no difference.

(apologise to any blind people)

[Wensleydale]

With more females being recruited these days, then average heights of personnel will have quickly reduced. It therefore makes sense to lower the bars in all messes thereby allowing everyone the opportunity to lean back on it and tell war stories properly with lots of hand waving without the possibility of knocking the glasses off.

[racedo]

with lots of hand waving without the possibility of knocking the glasses off.

You mean they allowing people in with glasses ?

[Wensleydale]

"You mean they allowing people in with glasses ?"

Only those who make a spectacle of themselves in the new lower bar!

[BEagle]

'Human resources' always sounds to me like some vile discussion in a Nazi concentration camp...

"Ja - ve can use hair...und gold teeth...und even make soap. Much resources can ve obtaining be....." :uhoh:

Why is everyone so intent on inventing silly new wanque-speak titles for traditional RAF terms?

[Laarbruch72]

Probably because your "traditional RAF terms" aren't always very descriptive of what the job is now? Times and jobs change, BEagle. Traditions are great, but the forces also have to move with the times.

Your translation of the perfectly fair descriptor "Computer Technician" as "Ground Radio Techie" sums up your loss of contact with what some of the the trades of today actually do. The advanced networked systems of 2014 don't need "Ground Radio Techies", they need computer network specialists. Just an example.

[Romeo Oscar Golf]

Good example LL, but Human Resources.......give me strength. Even the daft civvie organisations dropped that one years ago.
I am not a resource I'm a person, so let person(nel) deal with me.
Beags is spot on with his concentration camp comparison.

[Tankertrashnav]

You mean they allowing people in with glasses ?

On the one occasion I managed to wangle a trip in a Lightning T4, just as we were about to do pre-takeoff checks, the pilot reached into a pocket and produced a pair of specs, which he proceeded to put on.

Shattered my illusions about steely-eyed fighter pilots! Of course, even though I was only a mere nav, racedo, I didn't need specs myself ;)

Still, it was a great trip :ok:

[Laarbruch72]

Human Resources....... Even the daft civvie organisations dropped that one years ago.


Do you see it that way Romeo? I must admit that I never liked the phrase "HR" either but it's been knocking around for 2 decades now and (at least as far as I can see) it still seems to be in use at every major civvy company that I come into contact with.

I work for a major airline and we use the term HR, and we're not alone in that. Can you give examples of companies that don't use it? And what do they use instead? I'm genuinely interested by the way, it's not an attempt to undermine or disprove, just not heard of a move away from the term.

[Lima Juliet]

HR SPECIALIST

What was wrong with "scribbly" or "blunty" - you know the sort that work in "Handbrake House"?

LJ:E

[Tiger_mate]

REMF
JAFFA
PONTI

Always was - always will be. If you need to ask, you probably is one :}

[racedo]

just as we were about to do pre-takeoff checks, the pilot reached into a pocket and produced a pair of specs, which he proceeded to put on.

They were the shades to make him look cool.

[Top Bunk Tester]

RANT ON

I have had many run-ins over the years with HR/Employee Services/Payroll (That's right we have all three in our American owned large Aerospace company). Admittedly when I was still in there weren't the draconian budget restraints that are now in place, but I always found that the personal P&A clerk and command chain up to Chf Clk was a system that worked quite well and if you lucked out with a good clerk they were worth their weight in gold and would make sure that you claimed for all allowances that you were entitled to, which could be very hidden that you would never normally know about. It was as if the clerks were actually there to help you against the system. With the advent of JPA, no-one knew what could be claimed for and therefore money was saved through entitled allowances either not being claimed or the rules and constraints made so difficult that the majority just gave up and didn't claim their full entitlements. Jump across the fence to civvy street and it is my experience that HR et al is a job creation scheme for the unwashed and uneducated who are purely there to be face of the company to the workforce and to actively screw said employees in favour of the company. When challenged with logic and their own rules, they cave. What I have never seen is any accountability for their multiple srcews ups and failures.

RANT OFF

[Romeo Oscar Golf]

I left Flt Ops Warton in 2001 and the personnel dept saw me off. My wife left Sainsbury's as Personnel Manager albeit some15 years ago. So my knowledge is dated and therefore possibly biased.
When I was working Companies were said to change to the HR tag when contracting and reassume Personnel when hiring. Dont know if that's even partially accurate but it was the perception.by many..


Should check things before opening mouth......however I really believed the HR tag was dead.!!

[Fox3WheresMyBanana]

What I have never seen is any accountability for their multiple screws ups and failures.

:D:D:D
Most of the time they're too stupid to realise they've failed.

[Willard Whyte]

Baffles me why anyone would want to join. Or stay in, for that matter.

[LateArmLive]

Baffles me why anyone would want to join. Or stay in, for that matter.

Baffles me why you still hang around the Military Aircrew forum when you're so glad you're not in?

[betty swallox]

LateArmLive. Great point! Can't wait for the response!

Muppet...thread starter...so is your quote just hearsay, or can you substantiate? Please

[Whenurhappy]

The purpose of the OP has now been lost and this thread has degenerated along the lines of 'when there was an Air Force...'. Whilst I enjoy banter along with most who continue to serve, some of these posts simply demonstrate a sad mix of ignorance and insult. Whther we like it or not, the RAF has to move with the times to continue to attract high quality recruits in all branches and trades. Names change reflecting that jobs change; Navigators are no longer called navigators because, well, they no longer navigate (cue quip 'but they never did...').

But to focus on one or two trades - such as HR, to use modern terminology - and imply that they are useless, is just offensive and says more about the poster than iit does of the hard working guys and girls who continue to keep the RAF operating in an environment many of those who has left the Service would not even begin to recognise.

[jayc530]

Sadly, in the air force, admin staff are paid the same as engineers.

[Whenurhappy]

admin staff are paid the same as engineers

No they aren't, and your point is?

[jayc530]

Yes they are, both on the high pay band.

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

It will all change when evolving human rights and equality legislation decrees that Penguins must be given the right to be CAS. :ok:

[Union Jack]

Navigators are no longer called navigators because, well, they no longer navigate (cue quip 'but they never did...')

Cue quip that perhaps the Royal Air Force should have stuck with Observers - of the passing scene.....:D

Returning to thread, I note that many major US companies have a CPO - not Chief Petty Officer, but Chief Personnel Officer - to go along with the CEO, COO, COO etc.

Jack

[ImageGear]

While ever the corporate world allows OUR HR resources to believe that an organisation exists to service THEIR requirements and not the other way round, they will continue to perpetuate their obstructive, bureaucratic practices.

The term "Personnel" is more appropriate because it removes the distinction between the "doers" and the facilitators. (or revenue generation vs cost of sales)

Imagegear

[vascodegama]

Top Bunk Tester

I guess we have all met the BLUNTY who tries to help and the one that doesn't . The one good thing about JPA ( probably the only one) was that the rules were all online so the claimant could see exactly what the entitlement was. I took great pleasure in pointing out to auditors and BFM at the secret Oxon base what their rules actually said (and in some cases having to explain to the untermench what the words actually meant). The main problem with the JPA rules seemed to be the hidden emails that they relied on to diddle you out of what the rules said you could have. A threat of a service complaint usually put them in line.

[Martin the Martian]

Human resources as a term has always said to me that the employer sees the people who work for it as just that: a resource, to be used, abused and exploited like any other resource.

I used to be a nurse in the NHS, an organisation that certainly took the concept to its extreme. Although I used to sarcastically describe myself as an item of self-propelling mobile medical equipment, just to fit in with the ethos.

[Biggus]

I was told that quite recently, a year or two ago, an Ops Wing on a FJ base was referring to the resident FJ Sqns as its "customers".


If it was actually true.... :ugh:

[The Old Fat One]

The acute shortage I am told, is in IT Techs. In short people who fix / install computers / networks or have anything to do with computers including software. ( or should that be soft wear!)

Grunch... have not read the whole thread


I have worked in IT since I left in 2003. Currently I hold a consultancy position in a software company in charge of recruitment and personal development.

tldr...I know a shedload about people and computers.

The IT is undergoing a seismic shift towards mobile development and cloud based software.

Nobody (with any noodle whatsoever) is going into hardware/networking...Everybody is doing software degrees.

These people look, think and act like geeks and nerds (albeit highly intelligent, creative and increasingly well-paid geeks and nerds).

These people do not wear uniforms, follow orders and fight people...ever.

You see the problem?

[Tankertrashnav]

Cue quip that perhaps the Royal Air Force should have stuck with Observers - of the passing scene.....:D




Maybe we should have stuck to the original RFC idea where the officer sat in the back and told the corporal driving the thing which way to go ;)

[muppetofthenorth]

betty swallox
thread starter...so is your quote just hearsay, or can you substantiate? Please

Unfortunately the original thread has since been deleted by the moderators of the forum it featured on (The Student Room). However, the poster purported to be a member of the team at the Leeds AFCO (he gave the AFCO email address as his own) and advised people to contact him there, the email was the same as his username "SCLONE".

As you can tell from the first few replies, though, the quote was seen in full by other members of this forum before it was removed.

[betty swallox]

Cool. Just checking. You know how these things get over-inflated.
Thanks.

And thanks for starting. I'm loving the banter on here. This is what PPRuNe is all about. Love peeps getting totally bent out of shape about banter. In answer to Willard Whyte, it's this banter that's one of the reasons I'm still in the mob!!

[Mr C Hinecap]

I was told that quite recently, a year or two ago, an Ops Wing on a FJ base was referring to the resident FJ Sqns as its "customers".

Seems a pretty reasonable approach to take. The resident Sqns require certain services and functions for them to do what it is they do. The station provides those services and functions - ATC, Admin, MT etc etc. The rotary world understands providing a service to it's customers (mostly the Army) and the word has been used in service provision lingo for many years now.

If I provide services, why shouldn't I see those I provide to as my customers and seek to keep my customers happy?

[NutLoose]

Cool, so he has a chance.

http://i673.photobucket.com/albums/vv96/jesper1992/funny%20sjizzel%20dizzel/dont-worry-sir-im-from-the-internet.jpg

[Wensleydale]

Half of the service IT jobs in the section where I used to work were civilianised to save money - the MOD was really surprized that they could not recruit sufficient aircraft systems software writers for £19K per year.

[Four Types]

As per Wenslydale's comments above. Two of those civilian workers have moved on and I know that one of them has doubled his wages!!

[fantaman]

I don't often post on the form but thought I would add my comments on this, especially as I work in an AFCO.

To get started and to stop rumours, the bar has not been lowered for any trade in the RAF. There is of course the occasion where we have waived certain aspects of the process, the majority of these tend to be AST (aptitude test) scores but please allow me to put it into perspective.

For example, imagine you have a candidate who wants to become an aircraft technician. He needs an overall score of 63 and needs to score level 2 in verbal, 5 in numerical, 5 in mechanical comprehension and 5 in electrical comprehension.

Just say he scores 61 and meets all the levels required in the individual elements. If he is a run of the mill candidate then he will be told to go away, study up and come back for another go.

However, imagine as well as having all his GCSE's and A-Levels he also has an HNC and HND in Aeronautical Engineering. It makes no sense at all to turn him away for the sake of 2 marks in the test where he has probably had his overall score dragged down by not doing well in the memory section of the test etc.

This is where we would apply for a waiver. If we didn't and let the candidate go, we would loose an ideal candidate who has already shown he has the ability to learn engineering.

We would never waive fitness standards or medical standards, in fact these are the two areas where we are most strict. I would never pass a candidate at interview that I wouldn't be happy to have working for me.

Some trades have had name changes to make them more appealing to candidates. Steward has been changed to Catering and Hospitality Specialist (With Cabin Crew Opportunities) and admin has been changed to HR specialist.

For certain trades that are classed as pinchpoint, we will expedite the process but all that means is we will process them faster. For example we may choose to send someone from Leeds to Manchester for a medical if there are slots available.

Whoever it was from Leeds that said we were lowering standards was wrong and obviously knows it.

Happy to answer any questions on here or via the PM :ok:

[enginesuck]

Retaining quality is the issue in my opinion. Young NCOs , hell even SACs with 3-5 years experience are leaving at pace. Into very well paid technical jobs. What is being done to address this ?

[NutLoose]

enginesuck

Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 160
RAF Careers office tells people "bar is being lowered" for entry.
Retaining quality is the issue in my opinion. Young NCOs , hell even SACs with 3-5 years experience are leaving at pace. Into very well paid technical jobs. What is being done to address this ?



Totally agree with that, not all are high fliers and may be held back simply on dress standards at assessment whilst technically wise they are superior to those promoted, it always makes sense to allow certain numbers to bolster each rank thus improving it with a stronger and more experienced knowledge base, but didn't the RAF move over to a must reach x rank system by x years to be retained? I don't care what they say, not everything is in the manual, and it sometimes takes experience to diagnose the fault.

[adminblunty]

re IT specialists leaving the RAF, my last firm paid a number of ex RAF IT specialists £300 to £500 per day....

[Melchett01]

re IT specialists leaving the RAF, my last firm paid a number of ex RAF IT specialists £300 to £500 per day....

And with Cyber coming on line, once they've got some qualifications and experience in that field, you can probably add a 0 to those rates of pay as industry and finance scrambles to get hold of them. Whereas it used to be pilots leaving the service with an ATPL and lots of hours to go into well paid jobs in the airlines, I suspect in the coming years it will be the well qualified JNCOs from the IT sections walking into jobs with salaries that look like phone numbers.

[rockyDC]

Fantaman Quote:. I would never pass a candidate at interview that I would be happy to have working for me.

Did you actually mean the opposite of this???

[Willard Whyte]

Baffles me why you still hang around the Military Aircrew forum when you're so glad you're not in?

Red ants, black ants...

[fantaman]

rockyDC yes I did mean the opposite, corrected now. Thanks for the heads up.

[Pontius Navigator]

The acute shortage I am told, is in IT Techs. In short people who fix / install computers / networks or have anything to do with computers including software. ( or should that be soft wear!)

But probably not computers as many know it.

One area was on E3 Mission Programming developing and maintaining operational programs. The language was a rare Jovial and the guys were being paid peanuts for a highly specialised skill.

At one point a VSO was heard to say that the guys could earn megabucks outside; they must have heard him as many PVRd :)

[betty swallox]

Dearest Fantaman,
Apologies for the (slight) thread drift...

As a recruiter, what would you say to me when I walked in off the street to enquire about being a WSOp (Acoustic)?

This...

Non-Commissioned Aircrew - Careers (http://www.raf.mod.uk/careers/jobs/job-categories/non-commissioned-aircrew/)

From the RAF Careers website. Today.

[Buster Hyman]

Low enough for Navy chaps now? :E:ouch::suspect:

[MPN11]

Fascinating to see some the changes I was staffing back in the 90s become reality, although I never envisaged a Sgt ATCO being described as NCO Aircrew :eek:

[tartare]

Damn.
And I thought this was my chance to get my sorry, short-sighted, 48 year old arse into something fast and pointy...

[betty swallox]

Fantaman...anyone out there?!

[mymatetcm]

The reason SNCO ATC are on the same deal as the NCO Aircrew is basically they utilise the SNCO initial NCA Course at Cranwell, due to the fact ATC do not a bespoke SNCO ATC course. When they have done 10 weeks basic at Halton and 12 weeks NCA course they then go there seperate ways