Grumps
I can't comment on who is receiveing what now as it is several years since I left, but I can assure you that it was hugely common practice for FCs to 'find' themselves a posting that had became a 'flying related' post.
There were many FCs that kept their FP under that scheme and indeed, even the ATs did the same. It was ridiculous. We had SNCO FCs, Officer FCs and SNCO ATs all receiving FP after they had left the fleet and returned to their main stream duties back on ground tours. If that no longer exists then I'm pleased. At one stage, we had a SNCO AT, on a ground tour, receiving more FP than a front line AEOp. Disgraceful.
What happens today I can't comment on, but 6 - 8 years ago it was more than common.
As for the idea that anyone NOT in a flying tour should lose their FP, I can't agree entirely. Lets take the case of those ex Nimrod Crews who, through no fault of their own find they have no aircraft to fly. Do you think we should kick them in the nuts even more by enforcing a pay cut on them also? What about the guy who, because of his aviating skills/knowledge has been earmarked for a ground tour somewhere for the benifit of the service. Is it fair to give him a pay cut too?? I don't think so. If you are in a ground tour and refuse to go back to flying then fine, take the FP away then, but not when the enforced grounding is for service reasons and is not the choice or the preference of the individual concerned.