RRP (Flying) Review

[ALM In Waiting]

As this is a rumour site, I thought I would see what rumours are doing the rounds in your local crew rooms about the review of Recruitment & Retention Pay (Flying).

Looks like the AFPRB have been conducting their review since the publication of the last pay recommendations last year and also reviewing mountain leader RRP.

The recurring rumour here is that flying pay won't kick in until after completion of the post OCU six year RoS for new entrants.

Wilder rumours I have heard are flying pay gone completely/vastly reduced (highly unlikely)

Flying pay paid only on days when you fly.

Increase in the time between the levels of time between normal, middle and high rate flying pay.

...and last but certainly the least likely, vast increases in flying pay and Golden handcuffs payments for WSOps...

[Bob Viking]

I felt bad for you that nobody else had responded yet. So, to save your sanity I can confirm that I have also heard the 6 year rumour. Whilst it will not affect me I feel that, if true, it is a bloody ridiculous plan.

Firstly, you may find the situation, for example, where a guy/gal can be a Typhoon QWI at the end of their second tour before they see any form of flying pay. Effectively putting someone who has had to be at the top of their game, pass a myriad of demanding courses and potentially act as the tactical lead for an RAF FJ Sqn as it deploys to war, all for the same pay as the Stn Adj. Who, by the way, will probably already be a Sqn Ldr after his far shorter trade training and much more time to work on his career broadening staff work.

Secondly how exactly do the RAF expect to retain any quality personnel if you pay them peanuts? There used to be the pension trap, bridging package and the spectre of a pay drop upon leaving the service to a civilian flying job (which is unpalatable particularly to those with kids). Now there will be absolutely nothing to keep a guy in beyond his 6 year return of service. If the powers that be think that the hefty jump of a whole extra £4000 per year (pre-tax) that flying pay will bring will retain people then I suggest we send the CDT team to wherever they work.

However, despite all I have said please bear in mind this is NOT a cost-cutting exercise.

BV:rolleyes:

[Evalu8ter]

........and that Typhoon QWI will be earning less than a Tube driver, have less time off, and will not receive extra for working weekends or public holiday.

Few of us join for the money, but it is an increasingly important part of making us stay.

[Professor Plum]

Bob,

Well said!

The rumour I've heard is that after 6 years initial ros, the retention pay for those 6 years will be paid as a lump sum (with a further ros attached to it).

Not heard any other rumours though. To me it would seem inconceivable for there to be any reduction in retention pay, given that the RAF really need to retain all aircrew trades, amid the sdsr announcements and airline recruiting.

So cuts it will be then no doubt!!

[NutLoose]

Here's an idea, why not get the trainees to pay for their flying training up until they are qualified, rather like the Civilian counterpart who self finances up to ATPL and then often fly for peanuts as they hour build..

:E


Flying pay paid only on days when you fly.Nice sensible idea, but I bet that would cost more to implement and oversee than it would save in the long run.

:p

[Toadstool]

Here's an idea, why not get the trainees to pay for their flying training up until they are qualified, rather like the Civilian counterpart who self finances up to ATPL and then often fly for peanuts as they hour build..

:E


Nice sensible idea, but I bet that would cost more to implement and oversee than it would save in the long run.

:p

Possibly, but how do the Royal Navy do it with their submariners?

[ALM In Waiting]

Thank you for taking pity on me and rescuing the thread Bob 😀

Heard another good one from an aircrew mate who went to one of the pay briefs yesterday. More money into flying pay but probably only for front enders.

Also I have heard the one about RRP being paid as a lump sum at the end of initial RoS.

[High Average]

Flying pay only to be paid on the days when you fly....

That'll be all those of us who are on ground tours bending over and taking it for the team then. All of a sudden, ground tours became very unnatractive. Personally speaking I would love to go flying again, but long term illness prevents me from doing so. Taking RRP away would be a step too far for me I am afraid. I have no choice but to occupy my role, why should I lose out? It's RRP after all, not flying pay isn't it?

[teeteringhead]

Flying pay only to be paid on the days when you fly....
And would that not also lead to the problems that I have heard about in the 50s (well before my time!!) when "desk fliers" apparently had to get x hrs per year to retain flying pay.

Net result, ground tourists panicking to get the hours in at the end of the year, and then having a disproportionate number of crashes/incidents/accidents.

Tick chasing of the worst sort..... :ugh:

[Avtur]

for the same pay as the Stn Adj. Who, by the way, will probably already be a Sqn Ldr after his far shorter trade training and much more time to work on his career broadening staff work.


So from a previously unanswered/ignored question from another post: I again ask why Officer pay is not banded by he same standards applied to Non Commissioned members by the latest debacle? I believe that a Provost Officer, Admin Officer ou les bluntee, do not work to or possess the same academic or professional rigour that say an Engineering or ATC Officer (as an example) possesses, and must work and sign up to. Signing off a repair or limitation on a jet is somewhat different to signing off on an investigation, a deviation from some obscure QR or AP, or reporting on the quality of the morning barrier lift (for example). I have deliberately cited ground "trades" that do no carry the Aircrew bollock5 arguments, and I do not subscribe to the argument that Officers are Officers first; WO and SNCO subscribe to the same argument but their pay is still activity and professionally based. Lets get on the same playing field.

[3 bladed beast]

I feel for the Loadies on the Sqns and I'm aware of several meetings going ahead to resolve the NEM, the loss of pay from it etc etc ( figures i've heard are 17k over next 10 years)

Add to this the increase in NI from April onwards, which is another pay cut for us all.

The rumours I've heard from manning are that they are aware of the crisis and will do anything to keep pilots.....I think they need to act quickly on this.

Having over heard a conversation with a Sqn boss, he said ' if pilots just want to fly, they can hand back their Officer pay and just be paid as pilots'.

Sums it up really.

[Rotate]

...pay rises all round then!?!

[Bob Viking]

Avtur.

I agree with you to an extent. The problem is that that could look like an attractive cost cutting exercise and lead to pay cuts. I don't necessarily think the ground trades should earn less (although I think some of them are overpaid for their role they still have an important job to do) I just think that individuals who do the most demanding jobs should be appropriately remunerated.

Please bear in mind that I am a FJ pilot so my posts will always have that slant attached. It doesn't mean I don't care about everyone else it's just that it's not my milieux.

On a separate note if someone were to suggest flying pay on days you fly then I would suggest they need to decide upon what it is for. If it is flying pay then it should be payable from day one whenever you fly. If it is RRP then it needs to be paid regardless of your current role. Due to this contradiction I don't think that will happen. Otherwise, as has been pointed out, taking a ground job would incur a financial penalty which would be counter productive to say the least.

BV

[ValMORNA]

Teeteringhead,


In the 1950s, as you say, aircrew on ground tours, had to get in some airborne time - it was applied to ALL aircrew similarly employed. As an Air Siggie at the time, engaged in teaching the signals environment to pilots, I was sent once a year to an active flying station where I sat in Varsity aircraft for bum-numbing hours tootling around the UK with trainee Navs. (Once an hour I would send a Position Report based on application to my Consol chart of data from the Consol beacons.) Being based at Nos. 1 and 4 FTSs I got various amounts of time sitting unproductively in Vampire T11s. There may have been a minimum number of hours required to retain flying pay but I cannot recall there ever being a 'scramble' at the end of the year.

[devonianflyer]

I've too heard the 6 year post OCU rumour. The additional rumour I've had though is that is would then start at circa £12K (top rate now) and go up annually about £1k to a top of about £19K. Those already in training to retain rights to the old scheme, applicable to new joiners only.

Nothing seen on paper at all to confirm it, just consistent, repeated rumours.

If it does happen it would truly be a 'retention' payment for those outside initial RoS.

[Rotate too late]

I must say that whilst times change, the new approach (if it resembles that which is rumoured!) just oozes cynical, piteous manoeuvring, whilst the BMA is the mouth piece for the Doctors, the MOD has nothing to stand in its way. The head shed know that there will be a que of thrusting youngsters ready to fly for next to sweet FA. They that must be obeyed seem very willing to exploit that to its fullest. The word NASTY springs to mind.
IF in the minuscule chance that they read this....well done, you really must be proud of yourselves....:D

[Danny42C]

ValMORNA and Teeteringhead,

As I recall, the position on the (recently introduced) flying pay in the early fifties was that it was payable as long as you remained appointable for flying duties. On a ground tour, it was your own responsibility to find a flying unit which would give you some flying time to keep your hand in.

Some people were fortunate (I had a ground tour on an Auxiliary station; the Squadron (608) flew Vampires on which I was experienced). Others were not, the accident rate for returners bumped up, they changed the policy: now you had a fortnight's refresher course every year and a month at the end before returning to flying duties.

Danny42C.

[26er]

Having read all this stuff, I thank my lucky stars that I chose to leave the RAF at the age of 38. It had been fun for most of the time but was beginning to wear thin. My colleagues who left after eight years with a lump sum of, I seem to remember, £4000, were able to start with the airlines and have a down payment for a house. They were all senior captains before I joined as a second officer and it took a long time to get into the left hand seat. But I enjoyed the work and play.


My good mate and I were sitting the ATPL ground exams when he was asked to take a phone call from Air Ministry who offered him a scraper if he agreed to stay on. Poor sod was posted from sunny North Devon to Valley only to die in a Hunter 7 accident near Shawbury a couple of months later.

[BEagle]

26er was that the Hunter T7 accident on 2 Nov 1973?

[26er]

BEagle, Sorry but the date escapes me. I thought it was earlier than that. He was Ron Etheridge and had started his RAF time as a drill instructor- possibly as a NS Airman.

[BEagle]

Sadly, that was indeed the accident in question.

[Rotate]

So here we are, 10 months on and still no closer, it would appear, to being briefed on what RRP(Fg) will look like for those aircrew still sticking around to see the outcome. Are they waiting for a 'bad news' day to hide it?

Because this has been such an extensive review, am I being naive in expecting much from it?

On a similar note, given the push/pull factors and the number of pilots finding gainful employment elsewhere, what is the 'figure' now at? You know, the figure that any FRI will have to be at to make a difference now?

[backTOfront]

Rotate:

I think it would all depend on what fleet you are on and how many hours you have.

For a Multies pilot with at least 1500 hrs on type and having had a look at various airlines and the packages they are offering, I would suggest a figure of at least £60 000 after tax for 5 years extra service.

This would bring the pay to a similar level and go in some way of making up for the pay cut over the last 5 years, AFPS 15, NEM, and the BS of day to day service life. At the end of the day, it will cost the MoD more than £60 000 to train a baby pilot to the same level.

I suspect though that there is no money in the pot for an FRI. Also the MoD prefers the stick over the carrot method of retention, and I would not be surprised to see an increase in the RoS on initial conversion to type. Or dare say it, an increase for PVR timelines.

[JliderPilot]

I think there is a 20k fri in payment just now for those in the zone. Not sure if that is enough to retain the best crews / experience.

[Bob Viking]

The current 'FRI' is a sign on bounty for PAS. There are those that will scoff, but PAS is a good deal for those that want it. 20k pre-tax is not a fortune, but it's not the end of the world either. Especially when you add on the benefits of PAS.

Standing by for the usual whingers to say how they would need at least £1,000,000 to even consider staying in.

I apologise, once again, for being positive and not complaining about life in a blue suit at every opportunity. I realise this is in contravention of Pprune SOPs.

BV

[FJ2ME]

BV, whilst I applaud your positivity, there is a problem here. The PA offers are designed to retain expensive and hard-to-retain experienced personnel. The fact that the (in my personal view) derisory offer of £20k taxable for a 5 year RoS has almost entirely been unsuccessful speaks volumes as to its achievement of the aims of retention. It is not for me to comment on people's individual motivations but if a £2400 per year bonus for 5 more years is not tempting enough people to stay then it can be said to have failed.

This is only to be compounded by the rumoured "restructuring" of ab initio flying pay (sorry RRP) in that significant numbers of first tourists will probably be joining the already significant numbers of experienced operators at the queue for the door. I honestly believe that aircrew manning is heading for an unprecedented crisis in the next few years, and tossing loose change in the hat is not going to change anything.

[Just This Once...]

Over 10 years ago, well before the pay stagnation and allowances rape, a targeted FRI could hit the dizzy heights of £100k. Back then we were told it was cheap compared to training a replacement. As to why anyone would think a £20k FRI in the present day would achieve anything is beyond me.

[m0nkfish]

Bob,

Unless this becomes a permanent part of PAS then I completely fail to see the point in it. Such a low amount (in FRI terms) is totally pointless as the only people who have taken it are those that were staying anyway. Its done nothing to retain people at all and could almost certainly have been better spent elsewhere. Fundamentally I disagree with FRI's but see that in the current situation they are probably the least 'bad' option. That being said, they need to be significantly bigger to actually have an effect (just see what is happening in the US with the quarter mil FRI's!).

Flying pay needs to go and a separate pay scale for aircrew introduced.

I do agree with you though, there are still quite a few who enjoy the job. I was one of them until I had to choose my family over the RAF. If the RAF channeled more money into family related areas such as the quarters and childcare then my wife wouldn't hate the service and I would still be in.

[FJ2ME]

Accepting that they are not going to put any money into family stuff (quite the opposite if you're exposed to CAAS rebranding and the reformulated Families Accommodation "offer"), then the other option is to pay individuals enough so that they don't care. Quarters are cr@p, commuting is cr@p, so how about pay the expensive staff enough that they could actually afford to buy their own house within 40miles of where these people have decided to consolidate our assets? (You can guess which Oxon airfield I am referring to..)

[BEagle]

Quarters are cr@p, commuting is cr@p, so how about pay the expensive staff enough that they could actually afford to buy their own house within 40miles of where these people have decided to consolidate our assets? (You can guess which Oxon airfield I am referring to..)

Well indeed. Back in 1984, a basic 2-bedroom semi in Witney cost around £30K. According to an historic inflation calculator, that should be £91500 today... But it isn't. The current price is roughly 3 times that figure - which is frankly ridiculous.

How the hell will any JO aircrew graduating from advanced flying training to an ME OCU be able to afford to live near Brize, with such absurd house prices? And of course it's even worse for others...

Madness...:mad:

[MSOCS]

Consider this; the 20K taxable payment for PAS is the delegated limit which Manning can offer without recourse to the tri-Service board. That's why it is so relatively low. Higher amounts would require buy in from all three Services and (guess what) it would fail because a lot of branches are suffering.

How, then, do you decide which is important? You must offer clear statistics and I'm not convinced the sorts of haemorrhaging statistics exist for the RAF pilot branch....yet. The issue is, once Manning is in full crisis mode for pilot retention, it'll be too late to solve the problem with a high-end FRI because it takes about 12 years to replace a pilot with 10 years experience (training added).

I've always thought FRIs somewhat devisive and imprecise. Instead, there should be an enhanced RRP scale to truly reflect the situation - like LOA, this can be scaled up or down with the times, accepting it won't drop below a set minimum to allow financial planning.

[Bob Viking]

I feel that the apparent haemorrhaging of pilots is relative to the stage of your career you are at. I passed my IPP last year. It stands to reason that lots of my peer group reached the crossroads point for their career in the same period. It can certainly feel like 'everyone's leaving' when this is the case.

As I have said on other threads, I am a FJ guy through and through and something of an optimist to boot. I cannot pretend I understand manning issues on other fleets but in my area of expertise I am only really witnessing slightly higher than normal outflow. The growth of the RAF's aircraft fleets is a great thing but it is, of course, contributing to the manning problem.

I agree with MSOCs. I don't think we have a crisis yet. However, say what you like. Money is the answer. The RAF will be far more able to stem the flow and increase long term retention if they can at least pretend to counter the money on offer elsewhere.

It's not just about airlines. In fact, in the FJ world, that's barely even on the radar. People have broadened their horizons nowadays and overseas jobs are far more of a pull from where I'm sitting.

BV

[matelo99]

Personally, I think FRIs are never aimed at the people that need them. If people are about to leave, money won't keep them in, why not offer them a decent qualification to aim for when they leave instead. Why not offer them an ATPL (H or A) at their pension point? Many people I've spoken with in he crewrooms all agree that this would keep them in more than a monetary tie in. It would also be more beneficial for a second career.

Apparently AFPRB considered it but decided not to go with it as they thought it was pointless...

[jayc530]

It doesn't matter how many pilots leave as there won't be sufficient engineers to maintain the aircraft due to TG1 haemorrhaging people at a far greater rate.

[FJ2ME]

That's correct, engineers are currently a closer wolf at the door, but pilots are not far behind. It's impossible to give hard statistics without compromising protected information, but let's just say both engineer manning and pilot manning, particularly experienced instructors, is having operational effect. The people who are staying are being pushed further than they ever have before and will eventually burn out or give up. The equipment programme in the RAF front line is indeed expanding greatly, but the personnel element of that growth has been completely overlooked in resourcing. Extra typhoon squadron? Great, where's the pilots? Where's the engineers? Extra life extension for C130J, ditto. I'm sure there are parallels in rotary land too, but they are probably being masked by the offloading of Merlin and SAR. The cynic in me could suggest that adding these un-resourced squadrons does seem to allow SO1 and SO2 appointments to continue to grow, whilst not doing anything to increase overall capability, in fact I could say its reducing it. I don't know if you've ever tried to make an inverse pyramid stand up, but it's pretty difficult and very easy to push over. It is somewhat worrying that that is the shape our force is starting to resemble. And who will carry the can for these woeful decisions? Air Vice Marshall (Ret'd) Sir Doing-very-nicely-thank-you on his protected pension? Lord Self-Serving Narcissist, former Defence Secretary? Don't think so... It will be all too late anyhow when they find themselves with a garage full of new toys and no-one left to maintain or operate them. There'll still be plenty of people to run Equality and Inclusivity seminars and Fire Safety Briefs though, as long as it isn't on a Friday of course. Oh, and good job we made all those flying training students redundant a couple of years back...

[MSOCS]

FJ2ME,

You're right. Engineers are the most concerning issue right now, as quite a few left for the oil and gas industry before the bubble burst. Recruiting them is a challenge, as is encouraging young men and women to study STEM subjects.

I don't share your cynicism re: very senior officers. All the ones I regularly come into contact with are actively addressing the situation and looking at both now, and the future, not just their nest eggs. Perceptions differ of course, depending where you view it from.

People forget that the desire to grow the equipment programme will demand measures to recruit and retain. That money will have to be found from somewhere and it won't be a fair allocation but the 'facts will argue for themselves', as Churchill once wrote in his famous memo to Whitehall staff.

[Onceapilot]

There is no mystery here. Most of the good operators with skill and experience have gone to drive around in the civvi world for +money and no f'ing around. The RAF has failed to develop the career path and increasing pay structure that PA spine and AFPS 05 started to offer.:rolleyes: I suspect that the "event horizon" occured about 4 years ago and the complete implosion is now occuring. :oh:

OAP

[jayc530]

My point being that TG1 don't receive RRP, there isn't an offer of an FRI or other financial benefit such as PAS. The experience is walking out the door into well paid jobs across numerous fields, not just aviation. It doesn't matter how many pilots there are if they don't have the suitably maintained hardware in which to do their jobs.

[FJ2ME]

Ok MSOCS, what exactly are they 'actively' doing about it? Seeking to wrestle our housing contract out of the death grip of a money-grabbing negligent shower? Preventing the tempo of a base being set by meaningless compulsory training courses? Looking at real cost of living in UK and seeking to equate what both pilots and engineers do in the RAF which their actual real (salary) value to the organisation? Attempting to stop bean counters and REMFS putting conditions on operations and exercises based on piffling sums of T&S? And most importantly, what are they actually doing, in any useful and practical way to attempt to stop people WANTING to leave and indeed increasing both the quantity and quality of people who want to join? This problem won't be solved by increasing RoS and/or PVR times, and there is no point thinking up twisted ways of MAKING people stay who would actually like to leave. Whilst this completely beyond money now for most people, yet salary is a major lever that most VSOs or analysts are "told" that they are not to consider. If you can't affect salary, housing, T&S conditions, or family stability, then nothing that is done will have any real effect on overall retention. The people who are leaving have some very important information about the organisation and it's failings and it's high time we started listening to those nuggets rather than criticising their motivations.

[downsizer]

I keep hearing that CAS is putting people first, but I have yet to see the evidence? Has anyone else?

[N_1]

If CAS is unable to offer more than 20K without the agreement of the other service chiefs then the Defence Board collectively needs to act. Just in the last two months, in my swamp, there have been over half a dozen OF 2,3,4 PVRs across the specialised trades needed to fly, maintain and control our aircraft. By early next year I know of three other PVRs which will be submitted. How many more good people need to press the 'seven clicks to freedom' before the system responds with intent and resource?

[Just This Once...]

I know of a few cases where the Manning 'retention measures' have backfired and driven away guys who were minded to stay. All of them had changed types to bring experience and instructional qualifications to the gaining fleet.

Having marked-time during a delayed conversion and frontline work-up they are now being asked to waive their option points in order to 'accept' another RoS for the privilege of moving to the other seat. All of them are saying no and are trying to stick to the original RoS imposed on them for the OCU. Most of them have not done a single day of service without being shackled with a restrictive RoS. Indeed, being flexible enough to move types, roles and instructional duties just gets people penalised when compared to those who do just one OCU and then stay put.

The net result is the frontline gasping for the experience they need whilst a cadre of guys hold firm to their original deferred option points having been mis-sold an RoS.

[4Greens]

There is a world wide shortage of pilots in the civil world. Go for it !

[Geordie_Expat]

There is a world wide shortage of pilots in the civil world. Go for it !


Read most of the posts in the R&N thread and they are treated like slaves with poor pay and lousy work conditions.


Or do most pilots (military and civil) just like complaining ?

[StopStart]

Read most of the posts in the R&N thread and they are treated like slaves with poor pay and lousy work conditions.


Or do most pilots (military and civil) just like complaining ?
No we're not. But yes we do.