I know that this is a 2 year old thread but I didn't see the need to start a new one:
Given that people are the most expensive commodity in the RAF, and those that do not or cannot perform the whole range of duties required of them are (arguably) the greatest drain, are we being overly generous with retention?
By limiting initial engagements to a cost effective return of service (6 years for aircrew, 3 years for technicians, 2 years for ancillary trades) could we not, over time, build a more dynamic force that is more capable of meeting future needs? Allied to this reduction in initial engagements should we not be looking at a different way of retaining the best and shedding those who are not performing?
Presently for non commissioned personnel re-engagement is dependant upon promotion and this works - up to a point. The down side of this system is that someone is able to stay in the same rank for anything up to 20 years or more, they can do this almost irrespective of performance and/or employability/deployablility. Should we not be linking re-engagement more to the SJAR OPG than promotion? For example after the initial engagement every one should be looked at every 2 years and those with an OPG of less than "B" are given one more SJAR to improve or they are discharged. This should apply all the way up the non commissioned rank structure to ensure that nobody can sit back and think they have a job for life irrespective of performance.
From my simplistic way of thinking this revision would increase opportunities for promotion for all ranks, remove those who are not performing and reduce the pension liability across the board. With a little tinkering all of these measures could be equally applied to the commissioned ranks.
And the downside would be??