UK Armed Forces Pay Review Body 2015
Don't forget many aircrew officers will also be caught out by the loss of 'Family Allowance'. A recent member of my team - Flt Lt PAS at top end of the pay scale, with 3 kids under 16 lost iro £2k per year.
When you factor in the massive reduction in LOA (my location dropped by £10K pa in April, although today the rate went up by about £1K pa), increase in overseas living costs, (negative) - impact on careers etc, no wonder the manning staff are struggling to find people to serve abroad. Best job I've had - no doubt about it - but it angers me that I effectively have to subsidise HMG's business abroad through swinging cuts in allowances, in spite of 'representative shopping baskets' locally increasing at c 10% pa.
When I worked for HMG I never had any illusions about being either well paid or well respected - I learned my trade from them, got qualified, and got out. I leveraged my British 30k salary into 120k in the private sector, albeit the American private sector.
I highly recommend it.
I highly recommend it.
MSOCS,
A truism doesn't stop being a truism just because you don't like it.
The argument was made by PFMG that a government that was spending more than it was earning shouldn't reduce the number of public servants, as they pay their full tax contribution. This argument is simply incorrect, as self evidently the government pays public servants more in salary than it gets back from them in taxes - thus public servants are a net drain on the government purse.
If you bothered to read all 4 lines of my post, you will see that I also used the phrase in most cases a necessary one when referring to the costs of employing public servants - and I include the armed forces in this category.
If you don't like the message rather than counter it with a logical argument you attack the messenger - very enlightened - and very reminiscent of the tactics employed by a certain political party - but then I suppose this is pprune after all so I shouldn't expect any better!
A truism doesn't stop being a truism just because you don't like it.
The argument was made by PFMG that a government that was spending more than it was earning shouldn't reduce the number of public servants, as they pay their full tax contribution. This argument is simply incorrect, as self evidently the government pays public servants more in salary than it gets back from them in taxes - thus public servants are a net drain on the government purse.
If you bothered to read all 4 lines of my post, you will see that I also used the phrase in most cases a necessary one when referring to the costs of employing public servants - and I include the armed forces in this category.
If you don't like the message rather than counter it with a logical argument you attack the messenger - very enlightened - and very reminiscent of the tactics employed by a certain political party - but then I suppose this is pprune after all so I shouldn't expect any better!
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't forget many aircrew officers will also be caught out by the loss of 'Family Allowance'. A recent member of my team - Flt Lt PAS at top end of the pay scale, with 3 kids under 16 lost iro £2k per year.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: England's green and pleasant land
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Biggus,
You are clearly a glass half-empty sort of chap from the tone and angle of your comment. That may or may not be true but I judge you based on what you wrote.
I value the contribution made by the British Serviceman/woman, based on their overwhelmingly good value for money. When the Fire Service strikes we bale them out, when the security of a country is at stake we can be called upon to help or sort the issue out using "more than political persuasion". Either way, I felt the language and angle of your statement to be entirely lacking in empathy to the real value of those who serve (quote: a real drain on the public purse), as right as you very well may be from a fiscal HMG perspective.
Do I agree with you? Yes! You are right! My "attack" (oh do calm down dear!) was nothing more than banter chap. Then again, you may or may not have served so might have missed that.
You are clearly a glass half-empty sort of chap from the tone and angle of your comment. That may or may not be true but I judge you based on what you wrote.
I value the contribution made by the British Serviceman/woman, based on their overwhelmingly good value for money. When the Fire Service strikes we bale them out, when the security of a country is at stake we can be called upon to help or sort the issue out using "more than political persuasion". Either way, I felt the language and angle of your statement to be entirely lacking in empathy to the real value of those who serve (quote: a real drain on the public purse), as right as you very well may be from a fiscal HMG perspective.
Do I agree with you? Yes! You are right! My "attack" (oh do calm down dear!) was nothing more than banter chap. Then again, you may or may not have served so might have missed that.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Danny Alexander's speech yesterday made for depressing reading. The Liberal Democrats want to target the pensions of "high earners" (not my phrase, but always good for a left leaning legislator to trot out) in order to fund further spending on the NHS. The ginger rodent announced that he'd cut the lifetime allowance to £1m (from - currently - £1.25m).
This'll affect middle managers on Final Salary schemes far more than those on Defined Contribution ones.
So, you're a sqn ldr leaving at your option point with a second career in front of you.. you'd best watch out - stand by to declare protection or make sure you press for remuneration benefits with your second employer other than reliance on an occupational pension scheme. The thing is, we can't even hold out much hope that the rest won't do the same. Especially if Clegg is happy to hot bag with Labour.
This'll affect middle managers on Final Salary schemes far more than those on Defined Contribution ones.
So, you're a sqn ldr leaving at your option point with a second career in front of you.. you'd best watch out - stand by to declare protection or make sure you press for remuneration benefits with your second employer other than reliance on an occupational pension scheme. The thing is, we can't even hold out much hope that the rest won't do the same. Especially if Clegg is happy to hot bag with Labour.
Danny Alexander is frankly the most dangerous person I can think of in British politics. Well as long as you are hard working or aspirational that is.
In all the years he has been buggering things up for hard working people, I've never once heard him define EXACTLY what constitutes being rich. He's just another PR man playing the politics of spite and envy.
Fortunately, he's unlikely to be in a position to do much damage after the election either because the Lib Dem plague will have been eradicated and/or following Devo Max and the inevitable consequence of a English Votes for English Laws he will be neutered as MP for Inverness.
In all the years he has been buggering things up for hard working people, I've never once heard him define EXACTLY what constitutes being rich. He's just another PR man playing the politics of spite and envy.
Fortunately, he's unlikely to be in a position to do much damage after the election either because the Lib Dem plague will have been eradicated and/or following Devo Max and the inevitable consequence of a English Votes for English Laws he will be neutered as MP for Inverness.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Average UK wage is £ 26,500
so .................... choose your own definition....... 4x average? 5x average
or (most likely) a bit above whatever each reader is currently earning
so .................... choose your own definition....... 4x average? 5x average
or (most likely) a bit above whatever each reader is currently earning
It must be nearly time for the AFPRB to release its reccomendations - so will today's headline feature in it, Prime Minister?
BBC News - David Cameron urges businesses to give Britain pay rise
Or are we still looking at another "1% and be grateful for that"?
LJ
BBC News - David Cameron urges businesses to give Britain pay rise
Or are we still looking at another "1% and be grateful for that"?
LJ
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 146 Likes
on
28 Posts
UK Armed Forces Pay Review Body 2015
I think it's safe to assume that the PM wants private business to pay the increases but he wasn't talking about the public sector who have (mostly) received increases over the past year, albeit modest ones. Government cuts & further austerity will be the order of the day for many years to come, even if the other lot get in after the next election, at least in the defence sector.
So I'd put money on the AFPRB coming up with '1%' again!
So I'd put money on the AFPRB coming up with '1%' again!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Outside the Matz
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the FT,
David Cameron will urge bosses on Tuesday to “give Britain a pay rise”. The prime minister will argue that “conditions have not been this good for a long time”
Grow a pair and tell Fanny Alexander to stop pulling their strings and let the AFPRB do their "impartial duty" or get rid of these widely percieved puppets altogether.
David Cameron will urge bosses on Tuesday to “give Britain a pay rise”. The prime minister will argue that “conditions have not been this good for a long time”
Grow a pair and tell Fanny Alexander to stop pulling their strings and let the AFPRB do their "impartial duty" or get rid of these widely percieved puppets altogether.
I was told, before joining the Services, that no profession should be entered for the money or the respect. It should be a worthwhile occupation that utilises enjoyable talents and has the respect of the people one is providing the service for (not necessarily the employers). When those factors no longer apply in comparison with other occupations, leave.
I think, historically, leaving is the only language the Government understands when it comes to pay negotiations. And it's pretty slow on the uptake.
Any arguments about pay and conditions are fruitless because employees will always have their sense of duty exploited by employers who have none. The same applies to teachers, nurses, firemen, etc.
I think, historically, leaving is the only language the Government understands when it comes to pay negotiations. And it's pretty slow on the uptake.
Any arguments about pay and conditions are fruitless because employees will always have their sense of duty exploited by employers who have none. The same applies to teachers, nurses, firemen, etc.
I wonder if they will try to apply the 'nurses' model i.e if you are getting an incremental rise, no additional rise for you? The other option is like last year to slightly increase only the lowest pay-scales which can then be used to hide the lack of increase for the majority....cynical, moi? 
Oh. Don't worry. I expect the outcome will probably be a result of "innovative" thinking, based upon the "expertise" of those who would not stand a snowball's chance in Hell of surviving themselves on their own merits.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thing is, MP salary isn't on much more than an enhanced rate FLt Lt salary. Admittedly that doesn't include a London allowance but bearing in mind the lack of job security, I wouldn't say that MPs were particularly overpaid.