Re: Federation?
Sadly I think the time may be fast approaching where a Federation becomes essential. I have always been against such a move but the tide is turning. It needs to be Tri Service so no to RAFA (which is really an old comrades association). It needs primarily to voice concern over terms and conditions of Service, and act on behalf of its members rather than become a political lobby group pushing to maintain the size of the Forces or preserve a particular role or capability. To be successful it must be clearly apolitical.
In the past we have always allowed the Personnel Staff to act as both poacher and gamekeeper - on the one hand looking out for our interests in the AFPRB debate and on allowances and then on the other 'policing' the application of policy to make sure nobody kicks the ar$e out of the system through abuse. Now, with Service Personnel Policy being firmly in the hands of the Civil Service, I believe we need an idependent voice.
Whether it should be extended to righting the perceived wrongs that BEags mentions is another issue. Once again there is a role here (and some professional sub groups such as ATC have used their Guild to good effect in fighting cases) but whether this is for the 'Federation' or some other body I'm not so sure. This route begins to question the professional judgement of the chain of command - and while the Boss ain't always right he is always The Boss! To move off that rather simplistic tenet spells the end for military discipline so I would prefer to see a Federation that, initially at least, sticks to arguing our case in the personnel forum.
Some form of Professional body is inevitable - the powers that be would do well to embrace the concept early on and shape it.