Whilst I fully concur the general tenor of Strim’s thread, and wholeheartedly admire the size of his ba££s (we’re allowed to do that nowadays), I do have a few points of my own to make. I’ll use Strim’s words to set points in context.
“Feedback through the chain of command is merely watered down before it reaches air rank”.
Yes, I agree that there is a tendency on the part of some people to do just that. Whether they are protecting their own ar$es with an ‘emperor’s clothes’ approach, or really believe that what they are doing is the ‘right thing', I don’t know. However, I do have my own opinion about their motivation and have to say that – in general – I don’t admire them for it!! For this very reason, the Intermediate Command and Staff Course introduced a session with a very senior RAF officer into each course. The ICSC aims for this session are to expose the RAF’s middle-ranking officers to the thought processes, aims and ideals of the hierarchy, and what state they think the RAF is in and where it is going, and – in my opinion more importantly – to expose the hierarchy to the thought processes and concerns of today’s sqn ldrs. This should – at a stroke – remove some of the possible filtration levels between our ‘middle-management’ (deliberate choice of phrase, like it or not) and the ‘boss men’. Of course, this only works well when the visiting ‘wheel’ is totally open and honest and doesn’t just give ‘party line’ answers. Those who have attended the ICSC in the past couple of years will recognise which of the ‘camps’ (can I say that?) the person who spoke to them fitted into. Nevertheless, what is always said to the course students is that whatever the ‘wheel’ is like, whether he is the open and honest type or the ‘I’ll just tell you what I think you should think’ type, you learn something about the people who are currently ‘leading’ us, making the decisions and representing our case to the politicians. Whether you like it or not, you learn what you need to know about them!!
Pay aspects.
I’m an old bu$$er, but I like to think not a dynosaur. Back when I started flying, and on through the 70s, we were very poorly paid, both relative to the airlines and also relative to the public in general. However, we had comparatively decent kit, great places around the world to serve (frequently accompanied), good leadership and good jobs. Furthermore, we were not over-tasked for our numbers and did not spend all of our time away from our families. We had pride in ourselves, our Service and our uniforms, which incidentally were always seen on the streets and on the trains etc. In fact, I can distinctly remember (well not all of it) going to restaurants (actually mostly transport cafes!) in mess kit at breakfast time after dining in nights. Whether or not that was a ‘good thing to do’ is neither here nor there; the fact is that we were in the public eye and much respected. The point I wish to make is that, despite not earning proper money, we were a happy bunch and morale was high. Airlines were recruiting, but people wanted to stay to do the ‘real fun stuff’ that drove them to join in the first place. Today, we are actually earning a pretty good ‘screw’. If the bu$$eration factors were reduced, the trivia s**t-canned, and tasks matched to resources (because we cannot possibly match resources to tasks without spending money which simply will not be provided) I am convinced that less people would be inclined to vote with their feet. However, what we need to achieve this is a hierarchy who will stand up to the politicians and say “enough is enough”. We are supposed to be operating a ‘foreign policy driven’ capability. Unfortunately, the ‘foreign policy’ targets keep changing. The UK must learn to accept that we are actually no longer wealthy enough to keep pretending that we are still in the Victorian era of world power. We can still remain influential throughout the world by improving and retaining our professionalism and the respect which we once had from everybody else, including the Super Powers. We do not need to try to be the one and only world policeman, going in where others fear to tread, because we perceive (perhaps erroneously) a need to do absolutely everything – regardless of whether or not we have the resources - to protect our influence and our seat on the UNSC. The fact that we have been involved in over 60 operations involving UK Service personnel since Mar 96 speaks for itself. Look back in history and find me a time – since the second World War – when we had so many commitments!?!?!? And what are we meeting these commitments with? Half as many people as we had in the 70s!! Enough said.
“Let the pilots do the piloting, the navigators do the navigating, and allow people to be promoted for being good at the job they were trained to do”
This is an OK sentiment as far as it goes. There is no doubt that people must be - first and foremost – expert at their prime task. To be able to operate effectively in today’s ‘joint’ world, they must also be totally expert and knowledgeable in the core business of their own Service first. Only when these 2 objectives have been achieved can personnel contribute - as well as is needed - to joint and combined operations and the planning and C2 of such operations. However, if we neglect to train our people in command, management and staff skills, we risk grooming a new generation of ‘leaders’ who do not have the capability or capacity to make the right decisions and fight for our cause against those who would like to emasculate us even further in order to save a few more pennies. So my question is – just how far do you want us to promote people who are just ‘good at flying’, but crap at admin and management? There is a half way house here!!
“Because there are so many chiefs, they all filter out the feedback from the indians in their efforts to look good in front of their superiors”.
There is some truth to this accusation, human nature being what it is. There are several areas in which this has become noticeable. One is that when change is postulated for whatever reason (sociological, technological, economic [most common today], or political [second most common and probably combined with the last]), it will inevitably need a study to determine: whether or not it is needed; the aims and objectives of the change; any constraints; and possible solutions to the problem. This process takes time and must be done thoroughly and carefully in order to ensure that the right outcome actually occurs. All too frequently, however, the time-scales allowed, resources applied and deadlines imposed are ludicrously unrealistic, inadequate or both; this leads to half a job being done and we end up with a ‘back of a fag packet’ solution which is frequently not ‘fit for purpose’. Things then inevitably get worse. One of the reasons for this is the human nature need for people (whether they be at wg cdr level or 3 / 4 star level [which is most common?]) to ensure that a project which is going to carry a measure of kudos is completed while the ‘person’ is still in ‘office’ so that he/she will get the credit and earn a few more ‘brownies’. We must – as a Service – drive out this ‘me first/system last’ attitude, or we will never achieve our full potential. Unfortunately, vested interest and human nature are going to produce a huge resistance to that particular change. What can we do about it? Sorry, wish I knew. However, the right people at the top insisting that you actually lose merit points by not pulling for the team might help. Hmmmm – how do they get to the top?????
“Maybe our new CAS, Pete Squire, will buck this trend”.
Maybe he will (and knowing him and of him in the past, I am sure he’ll try), but will it work. We need all the Chiefs to be of one mind; we need them all to work together for the common good and not protect their own corners. Maybe they are now, but I’m not in a position to know (and never will be). What we don’t have a place for is people who fight for their own particular corner, whether or not it is the right thing for the UK as a whole. We must fight together or not at all. If the politicians insist on our being tasked to well over the hilt just to ensure that their own position is safe, we – as a nation – will eventually reap the whirlwind. Why? Because the lights will go out and there will be nobody to respond to the call to arms. We need a hierarchy that is prepared to stand up and be morally accountable for their troops. CHIEFS, JUST SAY NO – YOU KNOW IT MAKES SENSE!!!
I’ll finish with a quote from one of my very best friends and hope he doesn’t mind. Although he is talking about the Canadian Forces, the same principles apply. This is an extract (dots are gaps to protect the innocent) from an outstanding letter that he wrote to a certain high ranking Canadian minister; God, I wish I had written it.
“You and your colleagues have systematically emasculated the Canadian Forces to the point that they are hanging on by a thread. The fact that elements of the Army, Navy and Air Force continue to perform in an exemplary manner is in spite of the lack of support that has been given them. We have always prided ourselves on our can-do attitude. It is also our second-worst enemy, because it is used by our worst enemy (you) to keep sucking the life blood from our veins. The Air Force in recent years pointed with pride to the fact that they were still doing 90% of their former taskings with 45% less assets. Pride was justified to the extent that the Air Force was operating more efficiently; but it should also have set off alarm bells. The Air Force has suffered further severe cuts since then and the tasks keep coming. The same can be said for the Army and the Navy.
As proud as we are of our peacekeeping efforts, you cannot keep asking the same people to respond time after time while, at the same time, you are cutting their numbers and resources. The inevitable result is a marked increase in social problems within the forces. These include marital difficulties, financial hardship, suicide and other inappropriate behaviour at home and abroad. When something happens to bring attention to an incident, the public and politicians stand around wringing their hands and asking the military leadership how they could have let this happen. The public should be looking over the generals’ and admirals’ heads at you; and you should be looking in the mirror.
The whole scenario creates an atmosphere of mistrust and despair where political correctness rules, and esprit de corps is crushed. We used to be a work hard/play hard outfit. Today, they are just a work hard/work harder outfit with morale in their boot-tops and one eye on where they can go to find an employer who appreciates them. …….. any commander who says that morale is high and everything is just fine is either asleep or fearful for his job. Commanders are being asked, nay ordered, to lie to their people. The ones with integrity refuse and, hopefully, more will follow their example. The people they are leading are bright and intelligent and should be given the support that would engender their dedication. ………………..
………………………I’m not so naïve as to believe that you will even personally read, much less care about, what I’ve said. I do know that you and your colleagues are killing the effectiveness - and the spirit upon which that depends - of an institution that has shed untold amounts of blood to make Canada a nation, and you a free man. The day is coming when there will be an ice storm, or a flood, or an East Timor and the Government will call. There will be no answer, because no one will be home, and you and the rest will stand around wringing your hands and trying to find a general to blame. Mr A*******, for God’s sake, wake up!”
SOUND FAMILIAR??? Mr Blair and Mr Hoon – does this apply to you???? Answers by e-mail if you wish or can be bothered.
Incidentally, you will note that I have made no attempt to hide who I am. My nickname is well known at all levels of the RAF, but I feel strongly enough about this matter that I am prepared to stand up and be counted. If the wheels want to e-mail me (or perhaps call me in for yet another one-sided interview without coffee) feel free.
In response to Jackonicko – fast-jet various over a long period and in most areas of the World at some time or another. I have used my Hotmail account, but only because I don’t want to snarl up my private e-mail with the thousands of responses I expect from the Cabinet and other areas of Whitehall!!! NOT!!