Continually failing RAF Fitness Test.
 

I am sure I read earlier on a pprune thread that nobody had yet been thrown out of the RAF for continually failing their RAF Fitness Test. Well, I heard the other day that it is about to happen to someone at last.

Is this news to people, or am I behind the drag curve as usual?

By the way, I know it has been mentioned before, but I actually looked at the new RAFFT 'targets' the other day. Under the old scheme a 49 year old man had to perform as well as a 30 year old woman. With the new targets a 49 year old man has to perform as well as a 16 year old girl!

You can talk about different physiologies till the cows come home, but this seems a bit unfair to me. I thought the difference in male/female performance was of the order of 15%?

I can think of plenty of 49 y/o men who love to show a 16 y/o lass how to perform :E

There is a procedure for throwing people out who continuously failing the fitness test. The procedure is very fair and gives individuals every chance to get fit and save their jobs. From memory, I think it would take around 18 months from first failing the test to being thrown out if given all the chances dictated in the guidlines. So, for 18 months you have an admin burden and some one who can not deploy. However, continuous cock-up in the paperwork and Flt Cmdrs not following the guidlines usual mean people get away with it anyway.

What about the people who are 'un-fit' and don't do the tests, they can't deploy (or be thrown out). We are so short at the mo - let them do the jobs we all hate. Lets be a little forwarde thinking here and help ourselves?

Can't deploy if unfit? Not as far as one of our SNCOs is concerned. He failed to show for the test last year and only when threatened did he go sick. He is still sick/excused test but due to go OOA soon.

Another's march to fitness was delayed until he returned from OOA!

Pontius, I assume Gnd is talking about people who are un-fit medically hence downgraded and therefore aren't able to deploy rather than un-fit as in huffing and puffing.

edit to add the right number of spaces between the words :p

Except for the muddled thinking of our time....I would hope it would be more like 100% different.

Stuff, I think not. If you are medically downgraded then passing the fitness test becomes irrelevant. The failure and discharge applies to those not medically downgraded.

My first case is sick, unfit, but not medically downgraded, so he can do OOA, is presently exempt fitness tests and, as a corollary, will not be discharged for failing his fitness test.

The other was in the process of remedial fitness training which was effectively put back 9 months during his OOA period.

No, failure might get you kicked out but it does not stop OOA.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you can't be made permanently Unfit Fitness Test without being down-graded can you?

As in, if you don't have a TMES limitation, then any rule that you're not fit enough to do the RAF-FT must be very temporary and limited, and there must be an end point? :rolleyes:

seven4mk,

I am sure you are right but there is a difference possibly between permanently unfit and unable to do ones duty and temporarily unfit while still working.

at the moment it is 10 months. Without wheeling him in every month I don't know what his medical condition is and honestly I am out of the loop - trust me.

To take someone like this, who is time serving, and push him while unfit risks a claim for a disability pension. Keeping him in, and productive, both gives a chance of improved fitness before discharge and gets some work as well.

I undersatand that the pretty boys down PEd flt are about to up the limits on the fitness test...
So lets get this right, a fitness test I passed last year and be considered fit for ops for the last god knows how long, will no longer be valid and in fact I have now been told that If I fail the new standard, I will lose my job, having done over 180 days away over the past 15 months? So, if I fail, what part of "not being able to do my job" does it cover?
The only thing I gained from my last was a knackered back (syatica) after being told to do maximal sit-ups, a complaint that nearly got me sent home from det 3 weeks later in the middle of a hectic TELIC rip?
What about letting us do our bloody jobs instead of interfereing, and throwing out those who cannot do their primary role as a result of thier fitness? No, that would be too much like common sense, of course! :=

Unfortunatley our colleague Common Sense was sick for some time and having failed his fitness test, has now been dismissed from the service as an admin burden!:hmm:

Ref the standards for fittness test.

Male Female.

Same pay.
Same job.

Same level of fittness test or take me to court and kick me out.

Gay rights
Pregnant women rights
Equal partner rights
Age rights

The next legal battle is going to be the levels in the fittness test... You can not be biased due to sex or age so why does the RAF think they can be?

I am happy to work with any race, sex, but don't ask me to do more because I am male.

European court of Human rights might have something to say on this matter.

I did once get a stand in civi doc in the med centre to give me a sick chit excusing me the fitness test 'at his (my) discretion'!

Brilliant, absolutley brilliant!

Yes that always tickled me same job spec and LSN , equal rights different fittness tests hmmm wonder if that constitutes sex discrimination if so the Mod better have a big cheque book.

Regarding the 15% difference in male/female performance: there are of course different ways of measuring physical performance, but from what I have seen 15% is way off the mark. The study carried out in the late 90s to determine whether females should be allowed to serve in infantry roles included the stat that you need to get a 99th percentile female to get the same physical performance as a 50th percentile male. Perhaps this is why the RAFFT scores are so different.

Most of this was covered in nauseating detail here: http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...ighlight=rafft

Ah, the PTI trade, the quintessential self-licking lollipop.

Some of the RI's (Rehab Instructors) who go through Headley Court are a good bunch but the standard gym queens seem to only be interested in keeping their trade going at the expense of personnel who are perfectly able to carry out the job they are paid to do but can't run between two lines in time with the f$%^ing bleep test.

I wasted 30mins of my time doing the fitness test the other week at Odious. I passed no problem but one of my colleagues, who plays Rugby week in week out and is pretty fit overall, failed the bleep test bit. Apparently he isn't as fit as the 18yo lass who was on the test though I'd love to see her trying to play second row.:rolleyes:

HS - you've been watching far to many videos on detachments!

Actually she was a fairly good looking lass and I don't mean after 4 months in Basrah good looking either.

"New out on Det Video, When Girls Scrum Down {cheesy 70's funk soundtrack begins...}

;)