Originally Posted by
Tester07
a recognition of skills and potential in that there is obviously a significant requirement to persuade aircrew to stay by paying them a lot more than the basic pay, which patently does not pay them enough.
aircrew earn quite a lot less in the military, which they are happy to accept for a period of time because of all the significant benefits which go with working in the services.
And as student aircrew happy to receive no extra at all. Initially Flying Instructional pay was used to incentivise the recruit. In the late 80s it was expected from the numbers trying to get in that FIP was not necessary and it was stopped.
Why do you assume this just because someone has chosen to leave the service?
I assumed nothing.
Unfair I would suggest.
Agree.
Why do people assume a massive disloyalty to the service and a 'half-hearted' attitude just because someone has made a choice to move on in their life? For what may be many very valid and honourable reasons. It is the service rules which require someone like this to PVR.
Indeed, although you would be naive to expect that someone with months to do will devote as much effort to the Service as someone still climbing the greasy poll. They will be more concerned with getting the grease off.
Clearly you missed my cynicism, use of italics and the smiley. I was reporting FACT. PVR used to lead to grounding for exactly the reasons stated. Senior officers expect(ed) absolute loyalty to the Service and that included not PVRing, taking the rough with the rough and, as one CinC said, 'anyone taking more than one weeks leave was being disloyal.' IIRC it was Sir Andrew Humphrey.