I mean this in the most polite way possible but thank God you’re not in charge of manning!
Let’s say your plan of only paying flying pay whilst in a flying role came to fruition. How would you persuade any pilot to fulfil a ground based role if to do so would cause him/her an enormous pay cut?
Aside from promotion which requires, rightly or wrongly the need to complete ‘broadening’ jobs outside of the normal flying routine there are some ground based jobs that need the input of a pilot.
If an OC PSF (just an example that everyone can relate to) were able to deliver simulator training, provide aircraft SME inputs or teach ground school (as a few quick examples off the top of my head) then maybe your plan would have merit. I think the reverse is probably true but let’s not get into that right now.
Doctors who become consultants step away from the day to day routine of ward rounds etc to focus on the bigger picture. Would you pay them less because they spend less time in the ward? I hope you can understand my analogy.
Also, once again, it is not ‘flying pay’ and hasn’t been for years. RAF pilots do not get sector pay like an airline pilot based on the number of flights they partake in. Pilots receive RRP. A Flt Lt salary without RRP would not retain anybody who is a qualified pilot. Even the lowliest airline can beat that.
I’m sure I am coming across as precious to some people but since you brought up the civilian sector then think how the civilian sector treats pay. Individuals are paid appropriately for their experience. If there is demand then pay is good. Pilots are currently in huge demand in the RAF.
I know it is anathema to some but an individual who has received years of expensive training and possesses the unique skill sets of a military pilot needs to be remunerated correctly.
Before I get the ‘me, me, me’ banter I know that every trade can argue their own worth (ATC’ers are a great example) but I am a FJ pilot. I’ll stick to fighting my own battles for now.
BV