Staffing levels

[Hangarshuffle]

How much is the payroll then? I'd like to see it, and in comparison to other Government Departments, and perhaps a few roughly comparable civilian organizations, such as a shipping line, or an UK offshore oil company.

[kintyred]

So if government departments are big spenders that's OK then is it? Private companies are another matter entirely....take up the wage bill with the owners.....the shareholders...not the taxpayer.

[163627]

Too many officers?

To put this whole issue into perspective may I refer anyone who is interested to "Losing Small Wars" by Frank Ledwidge (pages 110 - 112 of the paperback edition). A very good read on many levels.

[Whenurhappy]

I served with another nation for whose military it was perfectly normal to adopt local acting unpaid rank for many functions.

Well, it might work...until something goes wrong. I present the case of Brig Saunders, assassinated in Athens in 1999. Local, unpaid rank and his widow (quite rightly) argued for some years that she should receive a Brigadier's Pension on the basis that he was wearing the rank and doing the job when Nov 17 slotted him. I'm sure there are quite a few examples from AFG and Iraq where 'local' rank ended in a few tears. My replacement in AFG was Army and given acting rank because of parity with the US - it took quite a battle to persuade MS that this was necessary.

I certainly think that consideration should be given to putting a ceiling on paid senior ranks within the UK military.

There is. But as Jim pointed out, the total numbers are miniscule. However, if someone is doing the job of that rank, what's wrong with paying them for it? (qv my earlier comments about Brig Saunders).

[Jimlad1]

There is also a wider issue that culturally some people seem to think that if you are an SO1 or OF5, then that makes you an amazing officer who naturally should be in charge. Make them a 1 or 2* and suddenly they overnight become pompous airheads without a clue.

I'm not sure why we think lower ranks are somehow 'better'?

[Melchett01]

I'm not sure why we think lower ranks are somehow 'better'?

It's probably a political statement on one level or another. Accepting it's a bit of a sweeping generalisation, I'd wager most people that peddle this argument of cheaper is better either have a sense of entitlement (it's my taxes funding this and I want to pay as little as possible, hang the consequences, they are irrelevant to me) and therefore feel their opinion is automatically correct and should be adopted as policy regardless of the facts. Or they are in a civilian organisation that isn't doing particularly well and having been on the receiving end of cuts and freezes to stay afloat and thinks the public sector is bloated and ripe for plucking.

It's funny how none you rarely heard these claims of cheaper is better when the economy was booming and the civilian sectors were rolling in cash whilst the military scraped by.

But you are correct that rank doesn't necessarily equate to better. I can't remember where I heard it, it may even have been a movie, a VSO dressing down another officer and using the line I'm your superior officer, to which came the reply higher ranking yes, superior no

[Whenurhappy]

As some of you know, I've been away from the mainstream air force for a number of years and only keep track of my contemporaries in the NY Honours List or on Social Media. I continue to be amazed how some of them have got to SO1 and above (no doubt they think that about me...).

There are a couple of chaps who have recently 'friended' me. One is a Wg Cdr and the other a Gp Capt. They were distinctly average junior officers, not particularly bright, not particularly quick on the up-take, but worked hard and did a range of eye-wateringly dull station and HQ tours, did a secondary duty or two, a bit of charity work possibly, and perhaps with an operational tour thrown in (at least the Jubilee medals won't look lonely!). But, as senior officers? At best in industry or other government departments they'd make middle-management, just.

Perhaps I am being too harsh on them, and perhaps I need a dose of the 'real air force' to adjust my attitudes. I hope not.

[Biggus]

I wonder what they think of you?

[Whenurhappy]

I wonder what they think of you?

As I said:

I continue to be amazed how some of them have got to SO1 and above (no doubt they think that about me...).

I attended a Branch conference a year or two ago and and those who hadn't seen me since 2001 were firstly surprised to see I was still serving and secondly, amazed/jealous/uncomprehending that I had managed 3 full and rather interesting overseas tours in interesting locations (and Op tours as well), and bleated on about me being on the mythical 'overseas posting list'. Lots of narrowing of eyes and 'you jammy b&stard' fake banter.

But when I challenged them and asked why they wouldn't serve overseas, it was 'well, you see, the kids are settled' or 'the wife, she's got a good job at the Council' or, more accurately, 'well, I don't know if we'd like it' and the 'well, it depends if I get a Command and a NATO tour isn't good for my profile'.

The conference was more to do with communal wrist slashing and managing decline, rather than 'hey, we've got the 2nd most deployable Air Force in the world and we are still pretty good at kicking ar$e, and most other countries still look up to us to set the standards'.

I've worked with quite a few foreign air force personnel from all over NATO (and elsewhere) and I have to say, once you step away from the 5 eyes and FAF cabal, most other air forces are sadly lacking - in equipment, training, vision, staff capabilities and - dare I say it - uniforms!

[Hangarshuffle]

What are the Russians like happy? Are they a good air force? Only thing I ever see of them (and ever want to) is on You Tube and the net. I haven't seen Russian aircraft since 1985, I think. on carriers in the cold war when they buzzed us (Bears, Bison's all that era..).
I think a lot of service people would be surprised how easy it is outside at work, if you get into the right job and groove...I grafted like a madman at times in the forces, for average money and some really indifferent/arse treatment at times...more fool me of course.
Actually, in retrospect its so different outside, it hardly stands up for comparison. You are expected to do so much as a serviceman...your trade or profession, incredible staffwork and IT...shooting....drinking to a professional standard, but keeping fit.. its endless. PJ would never get it.

[kintyred]

I think that what Whenurhappy said will resonate with a lot of service personnel. My experience from the sharp end of the Air Force (SH Aircrew) is that the command structure didn't do much to assist me in my job and that latterly (2000 onwards) there was an increasing tendency by VSOs to burden the frontline with tasks that did little to enhance operational capability.....and often hindered it. I have no doubt that the top echelons could be significantly thinned out without detriment to operational output. There has been talk of multi-hatting but I think a root and branch review would reveal much nugatory or duplicated work. I accept the limitations of my lowly perspective but consistently had the impression that too many of my superiors were not task-focussed and as a result capability suffered.

[Union Jack]

.....than there are ships & subs??? We do suspect "job's for the boy's" - PJ

.....than there are ships & submarines??? We do suspect "jobs for the boys"

Edited for accuracy.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

A very nice self perpetuating arse kissers club, at tax payers expense too! - PJ

Since PJ's profile doesn't tell us whether PJ owns one or flies one (or even whether he or she has nothing whatsoever to do with private jets), I suspect that he know he or she knows more than his or her fair share about arse kissing.

The very fact that the military is publicly funded makes my scrutiny, as a taxpayer, all the more important and this is where the complacency and arrogance of the military as a whole, in ignoring it, is quite unacceptable in the modern era - PJ

A statement that hit the highest level on my arrogance meter.

And oh, whilst writing, some cracking responses from those who clearly know what they are talking about.

Jack

[Rosevidney1]

If the part about eating Ferrero Roche confectionary and attending parties is dreaded by those who have to do it then I would like to volunteer. I can't claim great experience but like the character in Dickens "I am Willing".

[orca]

I would humbly suggest that surmising that the military as a whole is exhibiting either complacency or arrogance wrt one's opinion, having voiced it solely on Pprune and collated the views of three whole (possibly military, possibly not) posters, might be viewed as as an extrapolation too far.

[Type1106]

Would someone be kind enough to explain to an old much retired Sqn Ldr (04 in U.S. parlance when I was on exchange) just what an OF5 (Wg CD-R perhaps?) and an SO1 might be?

Thank you

[MSOCS]

O4 (US desig) Sqn Ldr / Lt Cdr / Major
OF-4 (NATO desig) is Wg Cdr / Cdr / Lt Col
OF-5 is a Gp Capt / Capt / Colonel

An SO1 is a Staff Officer of Wg Cdr level (SO2 is Sqn Ldr etc) which is often incorrectly used to refer to a rank across the board (i.e. flying or field job), rather than a rank in a STAFF post (i.e. HQ).

It's all rather tiresome frankly, as is this banal thread, started by a complete troll.

[Type1106]

MSOCS - thank you and how true! I'm surprised the Mods let this thread get this far starting as it did by an obvious troll who, I now note, has dissapeared.

Thanks again

[Whenurhappy]

Referring to my previous posts, I never cease to be amazed by the banality of some of our senior officers (Wg Cdr/Gp Capts). They apply staff college '7 step' methodology to problem solving or use the latest management-speak technique learned on their correspondence course with Staffordshire University, but do they really think about the problems in wider, indeed global sense? Do they approach problems understanding the basic concept of accumulated risk at point of delivery?

I did a pretty high-pressure tour in town and I was blessed with good, hard thinking team mates, AD and Director; most have now left out of frustration with 'the system'. I've chosen my own course, yet daily I hit the key-board with my head out of frustration dealing with the friction of a sclerotic support system that is the antithesis of mission command. Why do we make daily life support - especially for those overseas - so hard? What company in Britain requires that you send a fax??????? What company insists that you serve 11 months unaccompanied in a 'hardship' post, but doesn't fly you home? Or book expensive travel through a contractor 'or you won't be refunded'? Grrrr. And it's not even Monday.


And relaxxxxxxxx

[Melchett01]

They apply staff college '7 step' methodology to problem solving or use the latest management-speak technique learned on their correspondence course with Staffordshire University, but do they really think about the problems in wider, indeed global sense?

And at the risk of being controversial, I bet neither ISIL nor the Taleban bothered with the 7 step approach! Maybe that's how we defeat them - sign them up to staff college and wait for them to seize up and institutionalise!

[Whenurhappy]

And at the risk of being controversial, I bet neither ISIL nor the Taleban bothered with the 7 step approach! Maybe that's how we defeat them - sign them up to staff college and wait for them to seize up and institutionalise!

My point exactly. Banal approaches to problem-solving by a banal cohort of senior officers who should have left years ago. Not all, but there are a lot of place-holders in the system even now. To be honest, I should place myself in that category as well.