3% Payrise for the Armed forces

[althenick]

Taken from the Navy News website today....


The Royal Navy has been given a “thoroughly deserved” three per cent pay rise by the Government in a bid to bolster recruitment, retention and motivation.

Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon announced yesterday that the Government has agreed to implement the recommendations of the Armed Forces Pay Review Body (AFPRB), a nine-strong independent group which reports annually on the level of pay for sailors, soldiers and airmen.

The AFPRB recommended a three per cent increase in basic military salary for both officers and other ranks, with a similar increase in the rates of specialist pay – including Flying Pay, Submarine Pay, Diving Pay and Hydrographic Pay.

There is also to be a five per cent increase to rates of Longer Separated Service Allowance and Longer Service at Sea Bonus, which are intended to compensate for the separation of serving men and women from their families.

There will also be “graduated increases” in accommodation charges and an increase of 2.7 per cent in food charges.

In a summary of the body’s report, members note that they are encouraged by the upgrade programme of Service Family Accommodation, but are “more concerned that there have been cuts to the investment programme for improving Single Living Accommodation (SLA).”

The summary continues: “Almost half of al occupied SLA is of the lowest grade with all the inconvenience and discomfort that implies.

“There is a danger that these setbacks in the upgrade programme will undermine personnel’s confidence that their employer values them.

“We recommend tapered increases to accommodation charges, with no increase to the charges for the poorest-quality accommodation.”


The increases, which come into effect from April 1, will add an extra £216 million to the defence budget

Geoff Hoon said: “This pay increase is thoroughly deserved.

“It has been a challenging year for the Armed Forces and I continue to be impressed with their commitment and achievements.”

Speaking on behalf of the military, Chief of the Defence Staff General Sir Michael Walker said: “I am pleased that the Government has recognised the exceptional contribution that the Armed Forces make.”

In its deliberations, the AFPRB evaluates the comparisons between military jobs and civilian equivalents and takes evidence from a wide range of experts.

On this occasion, the review body visited 29 military establishments and discussed issues with more than 3,000 Service personnel and their families.

Ok 1st off I would NEVER take anything away from you Guy's and Girls out there on the front line I think you deserve every penny you get but I do have a couple of discussion points...

1/ How do you think this payrise is going to be funded? by more cuts, and if so what? as I dont think this gets voted through in the commons.
2/ Specialist pay - I know the Submariners are payed this even when ashore, the skimmers aren't, what about the Airy Fairies?
3/ Accomodation - Do you pay for this when at sea? I never did. But then again I was just a reservist.
4/ What factors are taken into account when the AFPRB make thier deiberations? i'll bet the increased risk of being Maimed/injured or killed isn't up for discussion:mad:

[Roland Pulfrew]

Full details available on the MOD website

http://www.mod.uk/linked_files/issues/afprb_rpt2005.pdf

:{ :ugh: :uhoh:

[tablet_eraser]

Await the attendent increases in food charges, accommodation charges, National Insurance contributions, family quarters rates.... Whatever Buff says, 3% is derisory. If we're working so hard, why do we continue to get a paltry pay rise that will be wiped out by increases in statutory reductions, same as we did before PTARMIGAN, FRESCO, TELIC, et al? I'll wait for Hoon to p**ss off forever before leaping with joy.

Speaking of which, given his rapturous welcome for our pay "rise", I wonder how much he'll be getting this year for sitting on his sanctimonious arse and decimating our armed "forces"? Prat.

So, how's about a little bit of analysis from someone who actually cares how much we're paid? All based on the AFPRB's report.

Precis of Chapter 4 (pg viii):
"We recommend tapered increases to accommodation charges, with no increase to the charges for the poorest quality accommodation,. We recommend a 2.7 per cent increase to food charges in line with the Catering grouping of the RPI, which reflects the costs involved in producing meals."
The RPI was HMT's primary method for determining economic rates until it adopted the EU's CPI in 2004. This index traditionally produces lower rates than the RPI, since it does not include the housing element which dominates the UK's consumer economy. In Jan 05 the RPI stood at 3%, whereas the CPI was at 1.5% - if the AFPRB had been consistent with HMG's statistical policy, it would have considered the CPI's catering and services basket, whose rate stood at 1.2% for much of last year.

Para 1.13 (pg 3/4):
"The Government urged us to be guided by the Consumer Prices Index (CPI) target rate of 2 per cent alongside RPIX and other relevant factors including recruitment and retention and the need to be generally in step with other public sector pay awards."
Is this fair? The AFPRB has been influenced by HMG in that it has considered their economic targets for public sector pay, instead of taking into account the evidence provided and making an independent decision prior to referring their recommendations to Buffy. In addition to this, they have been advised to consider evidence with reference to the CPI for pay, yet they have considered the higher-rate RPI for charges! Where is the consistency? This is poor economics.

Para 1.14 (pg 4):
"We are more concerned about failure to meet targets for the Single Living Accommodation (SLA) upgrade, particularly the removal of 12,400 bed spaces from the Project SLAM upgrade target for 2013. Almost half of all occupied SLA is of the lowest grade with all the inconvenience and discomfort that implies for personnel in what is essentially their home."
There is no context to alter this passage. Let's be clear about this: Project SLAM is failing. It is, in fact, almost completely devalued by the removal of 12,400 bed spaces, when the stated aim of the project is for ALL SLA-based personnel to live in high-grade en suite accommodation by 2013. And almost HALF of all occupied SLA is of the lowest grade. And they're still justifying an increase in accommodation charges across the board?

Paras 1.15 through 1.18: Briefly, these paras conclude that the Services' rates of pay and remuneration packages compare favourably with those of 10 other countries' armed forces. Apparently only Canada and France do better than the UK's Services. The 10 countries include the USA.
Who agrees that we are better-paid than the Americans? With the notable exception of the very lowest ranks, this is simply not true (for posterity, in the US private soldiers, junior ratings and junior airmen are in some states dependent upon Social Security payments to suppliment their meagre income - their accommodation and food are free, however, and of a higher quality than that which is provided to our most junior personnel). In fact, Britain is the only G7 country that makes its Armed Forces pay income tax on operational detachments. How about stopping this tax as a means of rewarding personnel actually engaged in operations? Oops - silly me. I forgot that our SofS is a spineless yes-man who cannot stand up to HMT and demand a better package for the Armed Forces.

Para 2.4 (pg 7):
"The Defence context for our deliberations emphasised the challenges facing the Services and the Ministry of Defence.... and budgetary pressures including the need for the Department to achieve efficiencies of £2.8 billion by 2007-08. Against this background, MOD told us that an award in excess of inflation would impact on the Department’s ability to fund other areas of the Defence budget."
So, the 'independent' AFPRB has been "told" by MOD that an award in excess of inflation would be undesirable due to its impact on funding of other areas. The AFPRB has been scuttled! Okay, so we do have a higher-than-inflation pay if you consider the RPI (inflation = 1.5%)... but aren't our charges based on the RPI? In that case, we have an on-inflation pay rise of 3%. An interesting economic sleight of hand. Noting the need to "achieve efficiencies of £2.8 billion", the question arises: why should efficiencies have anything to do with an 'independent' board? It should be up to MOD to work around the board's recommendations. How about reassigning some of the £2.8bn to the pay bill? And how does this compare with 'New' Labour's claim to be increasing the Defence budget? Well, let's see what Gordon "Jobless" Brown has to say on March 16.

Para 2.60 (pg 20):
"We are required by our terms of reference to have regard to the affordability of our recommendations. The Government’s evidence stressed the pressures on the Defence budget, including the need to make significant efficiency savings. The Secretary of State reinforced this in oral evidence. He reminded us that MOD had a “finite” budget and that any award in excess of inflation would have to be funded from savings elsewhere in the overall package for personnel. He was aware, however, as we are from our visits, that the level of the award sent a message to personnel about how they were valued by their employers."
Hm. So Buffy didn't ever want us to gain more than an inflationary pay-rise, presumably based on the CPI or RPIX (a differently-weighted version of the RPI, which discounts some of the RPI's elements - RPIX stood at 2.2% in November 2004). Do I detect an implied threat - and an economic loophole in the statement that, "any award in excess of inflation would have to be funded from savings elsewhere in the overall package for personnel"? What about the £2.8bn efficiency savings? Where are these coming from? Why is it acceptable to make these savings, yet the addition of more than £216m to the Defence budget is uncceptable? Also, consider the fact that a net reduction of 20,000 trained personnel by 2007-08 (the target FY for the efficiency savings) amounts to a more than 10% reduction in the trained strength of HMAF. Against this, why is 3% such a wonderful pay-rise when the Department could, in fact, afford more? Incidentally, I think a lot of soon-to-be-redundant personnel will be somewhat p***ed off at being included as "efficiency savings". The AFPRB could easily have recommended more - indeed, they probably would have done so - had it not been for sustained pressure from HMT to reduce the Department's spending.

Okay, I'm getting bored now. You get the point - the AFPRB's recommendations are unduly influenced by HMT's and Buffy's requirements and targets, and a lot of it is based on dodgy economics. It uses more than one price index (3, in fact, RPI, RPIX and CPI) to calculate awards and deductions, and it provides very little for the Armed Forces to be overly thankful for. Yes, it's a pay-rise, and it is welcome. But I think a lot of people will agree that it does NOT recognise the increased strain placed on the Services in the light of recent operations and - er - future commitments by fewer personnel.

Forgive any value judgments in my analysis, btw!

[hyd3failure]

1/ How do you think this payrise is going to be funded? by more cuts, and if so what? as I dont think this gets voted through in the commons.
2/ Specialist pay - I know the Submariners are payed this even when ashore, the skimmers aren't, what about the Airy Fairies?
3/ Accomodation - Do you pay for this when at sea? I never did. But then again I was just a reservist.
4/ What factors are taken into account when the AFPRB make thier deiberations? i'll bet the increased risk of being Maimed/injured or killed isn't up for discussion


1. It will be funded out of the defence budget.
2. Airy Fairies are paid SSP when ashore or afloat
3. No
4. The X factor.

[BossEyed]

Speaking of which, given his rapturous welcome for our pay "rise", I wonder how much he'll be getting this year
2.8%, as it happens. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/02/23/npay23.xml)

Or £3,650: up to £133,997.

No word in that news story on any change in allowances/expenses, however.

[airborne_artist]

Accomodation - Do you pay for this when at sea? I never did. But then again I was just a reservist.

No - no charge. Some might even get hard lying allowance, when the accom. provided on board does not meet basic reqs. eg. submariners hotbunking, very small vessels (recd. it in the previous HMS Sabre), etc.

[althenick]

H3F

Thanks for the info. but on point 4 I think the X FActor was used to cover stuff such as overtime callout allowance etc that service personell dont get. i'd be very surprised if there was a mention of danger or harm within its written criteria!

[Canary Boy]

Or £3,650: up to £133,997.

...and no doubt comparisons will be made, but my little brain tells me that 2.8% of £130k is rather more than 3% of rather less. :confused:

[Spotting Bad Guys]

Funny how the DHE failure to bring the SFQ estate up to scratch against their own timeframes is hidden away in the subtext....

Also the 22% increase in SFQ charges over 3 years.......


SBG:mad:

[Biggus]

With RPI currently running at 3.4-3.5% a 3% pay rise looks to me like a pay cut - no matter what spin is put on it - on the basis that most people in the military these days do actually pay housing costs!! Nice to see how much our efforts are appreciated by a grateful government!

I notice in the report that the authors say that RPI is forecast to fall in the next year, so helping to justify only giving us 3% - I shall watch with interest.

There is one conspiracy theory that says the MoD are trying to piss people off, so that enough PVR to bring us down to the latest manning targets. In this way the targets are reached but redundancy payments are avoided! I wonder?

[Navaleye]

Maybe they will introduce bedside reading lamp electricity charges to soak up all that extra cash! :{ :E

[tablet_eraser]

Biggus, I see where you're coming from. In fact, it's even more insidious. The AFBRB only uses the high-rate RPI to determine reductions, but it uses the low-rate CPI to calculate inflation, ergo pay-rises. So, by using the CPI's 1.5% rate of inflation, they can claim that we have a payrise of 1.5% ABOVE inflation.

The CPI was adopted to help the Government "meet" its inflation target of 2%. It does not include the UK's housing market, which is the most dominant area concerning inflation here. So in fact, we have had bugger all, since the housing market continues to grow.

Bloody underhanded economics, pure and simple.

[Incipient Sinner]

Althenick,

I think we have to accept that the X-factor covers everything. The 7 days a week, the no-overtime, the 1 hr notice-to-move, the cold, the heat, the wars.

Actually, I'm not cynical, just serving, that's what the job is.

IS

[lineslime]

At least we aren't the only ones to have been fcuked over by Bliars wise monkeys. Nurses have been given 3% as well, or so I am led to believe. Having just worked out the maths that is only £60 a month for all like me on the same payband. Take into account the rise in sfa rates and I may be looking at a cut in real terms.:* :* :* :*

How much are we going to get after Bliar insists we help Bush invade Iran?:E :E :E

[crossbows]

How on earth do you believe we have been "fcuked over" when we have just received a 3% pay rise??? if you don't want the money then you could always give it to charity.

I fail to understand people who moan and groan when they have just received a pay rise...bizarre

VOTE LABOUR

[Seat 17]

Crossbows,

trolling again old boy? Why do you bother?

Everyone ignore him as usual please.



Seat 17

[althenick]

Seat 17 et al

This is not THE CROSSBOW - notice his name is "Crossbows" an imposter b'gad!

Al

[lineslime]

Perhaps he is trying to be clever and hoping to fool people into thinking he would be stoopid enough to use such a similar title.
:hmm: :hmm: :hmm:

[Scud-U-Like]

It seems a reasonable deal, especially at a time when there are few recruitment and retention problems (AFPRB 2005 refers). The rise is around or above the current inflation rate (depending on which index you use), so I'm not sure what else we should expect.

[totalwar]

Exactly. The 3% is a fair pay increase and I for one will gladly accept it in the little blue pay chit. Thank you TB and GH... lets have more during your next term of government

[the daddio]

Didn't the teachers complain bitterly last year when they only got a 3.5% pay rise?
Surely a pay rise below inflation this year for the Forces amounts to a pay cut?

totalwar - I don't think sucking up to the Government and asking for more money next time will do anyone any favours. I don't know if you've noticed, but the Forces are deployed all over the world at the moment, stretched to the limit, and the numbers are being slashed left, right and centre. Thanks very much TB!

[TurbineTooHot]

Crossbow(s),

I know that you hanker for an argument well put. (See justifying lowflying example ad naus...)

I fail to understand people who moan and groan when they have just received a pay rise...bizarre

Right, we have received a 3% pay rise. That's great, our pay is going up. But annual pay rises are put in place to cover the rising COSTs of everything else (its called INFLATION).

Now, and I hope this is simple enough for you to understand, when the pay rise doesn't equal the increase in costs of everything else, it is effectively like taking money away.

This is why people are a little pi$$ed off right now.

Chaps, the reason that there are few recruitment and retention problems at the moment is because we have reduced the recruiting numbers and want to get rid of folk to downside the force.

What an incredibly short term view you lot have. Jesus, its like you lot are politicians going for re-election, or bloody adminers trying for your next promotions.

Or do you not think we need to recruit and retain the best people by paying them fairly. Oh no, they'll be the ones telling you that you're doing a crap job. Don't want them in rocking the boat.

Grrrr.

Turbine

[Mad_Mark]

The 3% is a fair pay increase and I for one will gladly accept it in the little blue pay chit.
As has been mentioned above, this is NOT a fair pay rise as the RPI steadily rose throughout 2004 from 2.6% in Q1 through 3.0% and 3.1% to 3.5% in Q4 (figures from Governments own website).

So a pay rise of 3.0% is below the RPI ("an average measure of change in the prices of goods and services bought for the purpose of consumption by the vast majority of households in the UK" ) of 3.5%. Therefore, even with the pay rise we are worse off - and that doesn't include all the Governent stealth tax increases :mad:

MadMark!!! :mad:

[CAC Runaway]

I see Tony B Liars plan....

Send us all over the world on Ops then give us a low pay rise/cut but we are all away so can't vote against him in the election!

[Last call for Mr..]

Dear Tablet_Eraser,

Thank You for opening my eyes!

.....right, yeah they are all B*****S , stealth taxes, petrol, National Insurance, Car Tax, Supermarkets, Credit card companies, rent. it all adds up. Just to give legal aid to people who have never contributed .....my god ....oh sorry..I must stop reading the Daily Mail:\ :\ :\

[WorkingHard]

Lineslime - Is your total gross pay really £24000 p.a?

[lineslime]

Take a look at JT/SAC level 9 on the higher pay band, that may give you a clue. If you add on the sandu I was able to claim before Dec 1st 2004 then it may be just a little more (not much over 22K by the last little blue chit).
Time to start taking 4 hours to empty the crapper, just to subsidise my meagre income, or suggest those who changed the rules regarding work of an objectional nature come and change them.;) ;) ;)

[Max Contingency]

Whats the problem fellas? We are all service voters (all 180, 000 of us). This is an election year. Register your votes in Prime Minister Blair's Sedgefield constituency (expected majority 25,000) and tell him what you think of this year's pay rise.

Oh no - now I have to hand myself in to the Feds for trying to unseat government
:uhoh:

[HOODED]

Top Idea max, now why didn't I think of that!:ok:

[FJ2ME]

totalwar and Scud-u-like

Please read the above again a bit more carefully and you may notice that the 'little extra in your blue chit' is in fact bu££er all after the 'little extra' on your pay reductions. My betting is that by the time the income tax, food and accn, NI mafia have all carved up their slice of the pie you'll be left with mostly the same as you had before.

And as the gov't acknowledge that the cost of living has risen (inflation is not equal to zero after all), so your purchasing power has in fact a reduced- ie a PAY CUT in real terms.

Pure a simple economic skullduggery. Bet I know what would happen if our friends in the nice shiny red trucks got such a deal. Oh that's right, military can't strike.

I like the Sedgefield registration idea myself. Robbing sh!ts. At least you expected to get robbed by the other lot!

[Scud-U-Like]

Thanks for the tip. My reading is fine. Calculating current inflation is an inexact science. Predicting future inflation it is even more imprecise. The pay deal pretty much reflects the prevailing inflation rate. I don't think anyone living in the real world can expect a salary to do more than that.

[totalwar]

Exactly. These people would never be happy. Im very happy with my extra wadge TY.

[VoicesFromTheCreche]

Crossbow, simple maths old chap. If RPI is 3.5% and we get a 3% rise then ergo we have a pay errrrrr cut!!

[totalwar]

Nope...

RPI = 2.1%
Pay rise = 3%


= Pay increase.

[Canary Boy]

totalwar...
RPI = 2.1% :confused:

Which figures do we believe (yours or those posted before)?

[X-QUORK]

For a definitive answer on the latest inflation figures, read this:

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/Links/setframe.html

Or, if you can't be ar$ed - just accept that the inflation rate is a little under 2% and likely to rise a little above 2% over the remaining financial year, therefore the 3% pay increase is ABOVE inflation and represents a real increase of approx 1%.

It ain't that much, but most of us in the private sector will only get pay rises of between 1.5% and 3.5% (depending on performance), so 3% ain't that bad.

I served for 12 years in the AAC and one thing we all accepted was that you don't join up to get rich, so if you think you're worth more...PVR and get out there to make your millions.

[lineslime]

Totalwar
I suggest you read pevious posts on this thread with regards to RPI. Was it not Biggus who quoted the government stated figure of 3.5% and not the 2.1% you somehow came across. Now kindly remove your head from whatever oriface it is stuck up and get with the program, 3% is a real terms PAY CUT!!!!!

[pr00ne]

Lineslime,

The GOVERNMENT do not state inflation figures, that is the job of the independent Bank of England, just like interest rates. The Chancellor of the Exchequer forecasts growth and inflation, but he doesn’t state it.

Like it or lump it the agreed rate of inflation measure used for all pay settlements is the RPI and NOT the CPI.

CPI is just over 2% now and is forecast to hit 3.5% by the third quarter of the year before falling to around 1.9%.

RPI is currently 1.9% forecast to be 2.1% through this fiscal year.

[pr00ne]

Happytruckin,

Not according to the Bank of England.

You are however correct according to January 2005 Treasury forecast!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Canary Boy]

So who do we go with... pr00ne, Happytruckin, lineslime, X-QUORK, Bank of England, HM Treasury...

I'm relatively content with my 3% (I already earn loadsamoney :hmm: ) but that's not the point.

[pr00ne]

Canary Boy,

Look it up yourself!

[Canary Boy]

pr00ne,

You already did! As did the others - so why do you all get different numbers and base your arguments on them as if they are gospel?

'Ere - don't tell anybody but I think I've twigged how the politicians do it now :\

:zzz: bored now...

[Mad_Mark]

From the Governments own National Statistics Office...

The RPI inflation rate fell to 3.2 per cent in January, from 3.5 per cent in December

and, as I posted before, the RPI ...

is an average measure of change in the prices of goods and services bought for the purpose of consumption by the vast majority of households in the UK.

So, seeing as this is the figure that measures what our money really gets you can see that the 3% pay increase is STILL below the Jan figure of 3.2%! REAL prices have increased at more than 3% for over 6 months and before that were at 3%, so it doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out that with a 3% pay rise our cash still won't go as far as it did.

MadMark!!! :mad:

[Canary Boy]

You've convinced me! :ok:

[lineslime]

Happytruckin
Even though nurses can go on strike their professional pride prevents them, even though it would be interesting to see what sort of pay rise they would be offered if they did. Whilst on the subjet of strikes an aged source mentioned to me once that the navy attempted some sort of strike action. Can anyone confirm that or is it just the ramblings of a senile old fool?

prOOne
Government or bank of England either way RPI 3.5%, CPI 1.6%.
RPI used to calculate charges.
CPI used to calculate pay rise.
Work it out!:8

[tablet_eraser]

I suppose you could count HMS BOUNTY's mutiny as a sort of strike... the union rising up against objectionable working conditions?

For posterity, any strike action conducted by members of the military would be considered a mutiny, punishable by x number of years' confinement (and still 40 lashes in the RN, apparently). That said, under EU Human Rights nonsense (sorry, laws) we are entitled to union representation and federation.

But where can you find 65,000 firemen to fight the next war?

[L1A2 discharged]

Next months PVR rate stats will be interesting, those who were waiting for redundancy and were not in the bracket hung on to check the pay rise. Large numbers being submitted, specially among the non FW faction.

[JessTheDog]

Is it now time for an Armed Forces Federation with a prohibition on industrial action but with pay-bargaining powers?

My answer: yes.

It would not be illegal under Queen's Regulations for personnel to set up an organisation purporting to represent the views of the Armed Forces with regard to pay and conditions. This is enshrined in European law (HRA and a specific Council of Europre recommendation) and there are a number of precedents - the Police Federation provides a similar model and the move to set up lesbian/gay representative organisations in the Armed Forces provides a model for an organisation with campaigning powers.

The Ministry of Defence is at best supine and at worse mendacious. The Armed Forces Pay Review Body does not represent the opinion of those in uniform.

The downside to setting up an organisation - career suicide. It might be a worthy idea for those on a career climbdown as the result of impending redundancy or being passed over for promotion. If anyone is interested, set up an organisation with a title (say the Armed Forces Federation) and a constitution and office-bearers - ideally with a retired air marshal or other service equivalent and a lord or two - and start contacting the media on the organisation's behalf. Note the emphasis on contacting the media on the organisation's behalf - this avoids that nasty QR about unauthorised contact with the media as the MoD are not being represented!

And when the MoD attempt to quash the organisation - sue their backsides off and stick the money in the kitty for future campaigns!

The media power of an organisation consisting of actual servicemen and women cannot be overestimated, because of the esteem the public feels towards the Armed Forces and because of the widespread distrust in the MoD.

I wrote to BuffHoon some time ago (via my MP) about such a move and received the standard platitude-stuffed reply.

[totalwar]

Why do we need a union?
Who would pay for it?
What would they do for us?

[welshwizard]

JESS

'The Armed Forces Pay Review Body does not represent the opinion of those in uniform.'

Are you saying they give a stiff ignoring to the canvassing of opinions during their pre review visits around the bazaars. Maybe we are guilty of not taking the opportunity to address our real concerns.

[X-QUORK]

JessTheDog

It seems to me you didn't fully consider the commitment required of you before signing on the dotted line. You are a member of the Royal Air Force, and you swore an oath to protect the Queen and her Government regardless of pay and conditions - you don't work for a commercial company therefore you shouldn't expect commercial rates of pay.

There are pros and cons to both civilian and Forces employment, as a civvy you might expect higher rates of pay, but you can also expect less annual leave, an almost worthless pension plan, and zero job security. There is very little Union representation in many of the High-Tech and Service industries, so an awful lot of civvies are out on there own if they have a disagreement with an employer.

I joined the Forces for many reasons, but making loadsa money and insisting on a Union protected 9-5 office job weren't two of them. :rolleyes:

[totalwar]

Not to mention the withdrawl of FRI 1 for everybody and FRI 2 for ME pilots

Wrong fella....the FRI is alive and well and shortly to be deposited in my back pocket TY very much.

[An Teallach]

Tablet Eraser That said, under EU Human Rights nonsense (sorry, laws)

Strange, I seem to recall you 'coming out' on another thread. Had it not been for said 'nonsense', you would have been subjected to severely intrusive investigation and discharged from the Service.

BTW, European Human Rights law derives from the European Convention on Human Rights and the Court set up to enforce the convention after the excesses of WW2. Churchill was a leading light in setting up the convention. It has cock-all to do with the EU. There are many contracting parties to the convention who are not members of the EU.

[JessTheDog]

JessTheDog

It seems to me you didn't fully consider the commitment required of you before signing on the dotted line. You are a member of the Royal Air Force, and you swore an oath to protect the Queen and her Government regardless of pay and conditions - you don't work for a commercial company therefore you shouldn't expect commercial rates of pay.


I accepted my commission for a variety of reasons and indeed swore an oath, with a nice scroll to boot. I accepted the requirement to risk life, to put up with unsocial hours and all the rest that comes with the honour of service in the Armed Forces. It was explained at Cranditz that "you'll never be rich, but you'll never be poor" and that those with a mercenary bent should seek employment elsewhere.

Nevertheless, I had the naiive expectation that our selfless service and the relinquishment of certain rights enjoyed in civilian life would be recognised by HMG with the maintenance of appropriate terms and conditions of service. This was the case until recently and it is manifestly clear that the unwritten (but clearly understood) "psychological contract" (mentioned in many publications) between HMG and the Armed Forces regarding terms and conditions of service (and duty of care, but that is another topic) is now treated with utter contempt by the MoD. The pay rise is a minor bone of contention; what angers me more are the disgraceful changes to the pension scheme, the above-inflation increases in quartering charges and the contribution in lieu of council tax and the slashing of tens of millions from the SLAM budget (as seen in print by yours truly).

Moreover, other organisations with a duty to the Crown enjoy representation outwith the command chain, such as the police and the security services. Finally, it is indeed a requirement of public duty to put service before self, and it is disappointing that others in public life (MPs and government ministers) do not lead by example. Leadership and selflessness in today's society is in inverse proportion to rank.

This is why the Armed Forces need representation in the form of a federation.

[16 blades]

Not to mention the withdrawl of FRI 1 for everybody and FRI 2 for ME pilots

Wrong fella....the FRI is alive and well and shortly to be deposited in my back pocket TY very much.

Does this mean that FRI 1 is still extant for ME pilots? I have yet to see anything in print on this subject.

16B

[totalwar]

The pay rise is a minor bone of contention; what angers me more are the disgraceful changes to the pension scheme, the above-inflation increases in quartering charges and the contribution in lieu of council tax and the slashing of tens of millions from the SLAM budget (as seen in print by yours truly).

Pension scheme - Thank your lucky stars you have one which is free and safe from robbers

Quarters - I pay approx £250 for a brand new 4 bed mansion. Try gettin that in civvy St

Council tax - why should you get a subsidy at all. Millions don't

SLAM budget - well do something about it then.

[tablet_eraser]

AT, fair point, well made. I don't deny that the right for gay people to serve was won through the European Courts; nor do I deny that HRA was implemented with the best of intentions. However, I do feel that some elements of the HRA have a tendency to over-egg the pudding when it comes to the military. That's why France opted her Armed Forces out of its own HRA. Employment law is one thing - and under that, you cannot discriminate against people based upon their sexual orientation. But the Armed Forces require certain reservations in order to be an effective fighting force. It's a difficult concept, maybe one for another thread - but please PM me if you'd like to continue the debate.

[JessTheDog]

Pension scheme - Thank your lucky stars you have one which is free and safe from robbers

It is not free; it is contributory.

A Federation could have lobbied against changes to the scheme, which were heavily criticised by the House of Commons Defence Committee.

Quarters - I pay approx £250 for a brand new 4 bed mansion. Try gettin that in civvy St

As did I but HMG does make one move around quite a lot. If quarters are substandard or not repaired in time (as I experienced at the secret Walters' Ash bunker) then a Federation could campaign on these issues.

Council tax - why should you get a subsidy at all. Millions don't

I don't want a subsidy. Rather recognition that CILOCT (and other costs) increase above the pay rise rate and are calculated using a different measure of inflation, as others have pointed out. I was also starting to develop the suspicion that CILOCT was increasing at a higher rate that "civvie" council tax, but they surely wouldn't do that...:rolleyes: A Federation could ensure that such matters were raised in public and why pay the full whack when OOA in any case?

SLAM budget - well do something about it then.

Above my pay grade and (just) after my time as I now have the illustrious rank of "Mr!" A Federation.....etc!

[Climebear]

JessTheDog

It would not be illegal under Queen's Regulations for personnel to set up an organisation purporting to represent the views of the Armed Forces with regard to pay and conditions. This is enshrined in European law (HRA and a specific Council of Europre recommendation) and there are a number of precedents - the Police Federation provides a similar model and the move to set up lesbian/gay representative organisations in the Armed Forces provides a model for an organisation with campaigning powers.

Please explain your interpretation of the HRA that allows us the right to a representative body. The quote from the act is below (my bold emphasis)

ARTICLE 11
FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY AND ASSOCIATION
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

2. No restrictions shall be placed on the exercise of these rights other than such as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. This Article shall not prevent the imposition of lawful restrictions on the exercise of these rights by members of the armed forces, of the police or of the administration of the State.

This is a direct lift from both the ECHR that was the basis for the HRA. As you can see, Parliament has the authority to prevent such federation should it wish too. The fact that it allows a federation for the police and unions for most civil servants but does not allow such a body for the armed forces is a matter of policy not law.

The full act (if you really cannot get to sleep) is at [URL=http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1998/19980042.htm]

As an aside, you may wish to scan article 4 which states that military service is not covered by the prohibition of forced or compulsory labour!

[totalwar]

I didnt manage to slide in....I'm in the senior service and we are still dishing out the FRI wadge to retain our people.

[JessTheDog]

This Article shall not prevent the imposition of lawful restrictions on the exercise of these rights by members of the armed forces, of the police or of the administration of the State.


There exist no primary or secondary legislation imposing said lawful restrictions. Queens' Regulations are based on prerogative powers and are therefore not "lawful restrictions".

As I have said - if some intrepid souls want to start such a venture, MoD can try to prevent it but will fail in the courts. If MoD paid heed to the psychological contract and duty of care and were not the mendacious and distrusted shower they are (led by that idiot BuffHoon) then such a move would not be necessary.

[totalwar]

If MoD paid heed to the psychological contract and duty of care and were not the mendacious and distrusted shower they are (led by that idiot BuffHoon) then such a move would not be necessary.

There is no requirement for any such venture. Why would we need such a thing and why should we be forced to pay for it? The MOD is an extremely responsible employer and they are certainly NOT mendacious nor distrusted. And Mr Hoon is clearly doing well as the SofS.
There is no reason for any6one to contest our rights or the welfare package...it is a good package and well worth every penny.

The Royal Navy and Royal Marines offer highly competitive salaries, and so much more than just money. The wide range of benefits and opportunities make the ‘Naval Package’ unrivalled in the employment market today. So, what do you get?

Variety of employment

Within every branch or specialisation, Service men and women can expect to change jobs every 3–4 years.

This can involve moving to a new ship, an appointment in a shore base, a headquarters or even the Ministry of Defence.

Opportunities also exist to serve with other Armed Forces in the UK and abroad.

This wide range of tasks and responsibilities will build into a unique portfolio of experience which will help you to progress your career within the Navy and Marines and later, when you choose to return to civilian life.
Job Security
In these days of short-term contracts and rapid hiring and firing, the Navy provides unparalleled stability.

The length of initial contract depends on what branch of the Naval Service you decide to join.

Opportunities exist for those who apply and are selected for longer service. In all cases it is possible to leave after an initial training period of between 2–4 years.
Training
The Navy is one of the largest training organisations in the UK, with a vast range of professional training courses ranging in length from a few days to several years.

The majority of courses are civilian accredited, allowing a seamless transfer of skills within the Service and beyond. Such accreditation varies from branch to branch but ranges from BTEC and NVQ awards to Foundation and further Degrees.
Through life learning
The Navy encourages and facilitates the personal development of its people, offering opportunities for study for GCSEs, A-levels and beyond, with excellent facilities for Information Technology training.

There is ready access to learning centres and specialist education staff in all establishments. In addition, a team of dedicated training specialists supports ships.

All Naval personnel have access to an annual education allowance.
Fitness and Sport
The Navy provides free access to high quality sports facilities in every shore establishment and in most ships.

Unrivalled opportunities exist, from inter-ship and establishment leagues to representing the Navy or even the UK at home and abroad.

Adventurous training courses could find you taking part in the Ten Tors event on Dartmoor, skiing in the Alps or even walking in the Atlas Mountains of Morocco.
Medical Benefits
Free and prompt access to full medical and dental care ashore and afloat.
Housing
Accommodation at sea is free, and living costs ashore are heavily subsidised.

There are two basic forms: Single accommodation in shore establishments or, normally close by, Family Housing for married personel.
Leave
30 days paid leave annually plus public holidays.A generous Resettlement Package, which provides up to 11 weeks (paid) leave and up to approximately £3,000 in grants, exists to assist in finding a job.

Access is free, and the longer you serve, the more benefits are available.
Pension
The Naval Pension Scheme is noncontributory,index linked and based on your final salary.

In addition, a tax-free lump sum of three times the annual rate of pension is provided.

[Training Risky]

Crikey Totalwar, are you Buffhoon in disguise, director of Navy spinning, or simply brownnosing for promotion?

[JessTheDog]

There is no requirement for any such venture. Why would we need such a thing and why should we be forced to pay for it? The MOD is an extremely responsible employer and they are certainly NOT mendacious nor distrusted. And Mr Hoon is clearly doing well as the SofS.

It is a bit early in the day to be p*ssed so one can only assume this is from the New Labour Handbook of Propaganda.

The important bit first:

The Naval Pension Scheme is noncontributory,index linked and based on your final salary.
I am assuming that Naval, means "Armed Forces". This statement is untrue; the pension scheme is not noncontributory.

The MOD is an extremely responsible employer and they are certainly NOT mendacious nor distrusted. And Mr Hoon is clearly doing well as the SofS.
An opinion poll sometime in 2003 found that less than 20% of the public trusted the MoD. I will search for this and provide a link in due course; I bet that the "in house" view is even more scathing. With good reason, as incidents such as the disgraceful attitude of the MoD and certain air marshals to the Mull of Kintyre crash, the suicide of Dr Kelly, the suppression of dissenting (and, inconveniently correct) analysis on WMD within DIS, the Deepcut suicides, the failure to consult personnel of changes to the pension scheme (read the HCDC report on this), equipment procurement failures, equipment supply failures etc... Any honourable man would have resigned as SoS over 18 months ago; Hoon is without honour as well as blitheringly incompetent.

In these days of short-term contracts and rapid hiring and firing, the Navy provides unparalleled stability. Again, read Armed Forces for Navy, and not true if you are MCP'd in the Army (Caplin misled the House on the use of MCPs) or made redundant as the result of shortsighted and ridiculous RAB-driven cuts.

30 days paid leave annually plus public holidays.A generous Resettlement Package, which provides up to 11 weeks (paid) leave and up to approximately £3,000 in grants, exists to assist in finding a job.
Public holidays are not an entitlement; the leave is great if you get the chance to take it. The resettlement package is dependent on length of service and, once more, not an entitlement.

There are more holes in the Panglossian recruitment literature but, coming back to a point made on conditions of service earlier:

You are a member of the Royal Air Force, and you swore an oath to protect the Queen and her Government regardless of pay and conditions
I don't see that mentioned in the literature. Typical MoD - promise it and don't deliver it.

Two clarifications regarding armed forces representation:

1. QRs do not actually prohibit the establishment or membership of such an organisation. The relevant QR permits the joining of trade unions for professional purposes and with certain restrictions.

2. The issue of primary or secondary legislation versus prerogative powers is clear-cut for derogations from HRA; it is less clear how this difference would apply to "lawful restrictions" mentioned earlier, which would not constitute derogation. Probably a matter for the courts to sort out.

[totalwar]

This statement is untrue; the pension scheme is not noncontributory Yes it is. How much a month do you contribute to your pension then?

An opinion poll sometime in 2003 found that less than 20% of the public trusted the MoD but in a survey conducted in Autumn 2004 the opinion Poll found that 75% of the public trusted the MOD. You need to remember that the previous poll was taken during GWII.

and Leave IS an entitlement and days worked conducting duty amount to a days leave so when doing one duty a month that equates to an extra 12 days a year which takes it up to 48 days a year. Not bad. Compared to my bessy oppo who works for Texaco in London who gets no ressetlement, 10 days paid leave a year and he has to pay for his medicals, dentist. he is a member of a Gym at £50 a month...

the grass is not greener fellas....just a different shade of brown.

[JessTheDog]

Yes it is. How much a month do you contribute to your pension then?

No it isn't!!! The military salary is decreased to take into account a contribution towards the pension. This should be mentioned in the AFPRB preamble somewhere.

but in a survey conducted in Autumn 2004 the opinion Poll found that 75% of the public trusted the MOD. You need to remember that the previous poll was taken during GWII.

Do you have a link? I'm also keen to see the results of one of the internal surveys carried out from time to time.

and Leave IS an entitlement and days worked conducting duty amount to a days leave so when doing one duty a month that equates to an extra 12 days a year which takes it up to 48 days a year.

Leave is not an entitlement; QRs and APs are explicit on this issue with the standard caveat "subject to the exigencies of the service" or words to this effect. The rules for carrying forward untake leave in excess of 15 days are convoluted; I used to encourage my subordinates to put in fantasy leave passes to allow them to carry forward untaken leave - OOAs and overstretch (not a word MoD recognises) meant taking leave was very difficult. I never received any days off in lieu of duties; you might be referring to the generous RN harmony time guidelines issued under the signature of 2SL a couple of years ago which were waved provocatively under light blue noses by the dark blue within my purple contingent.

The military is fine and dandy when it works but overstretch and reckless cutbacks have made things unpleasant, with no opportunity for redress. In civvy street you tend to know that when you go home at night then that's it for the day and that if you get divorced it is unlikely to be because of prolonged seperation; if you don't like your job you can change it without waiting 12 or 18 months.

[The Gorilla]

Trust me, the Armed Forces pension scheme is by legal definition NON CONTRIBUTORY.

It is true that the AFPRB reduces your annual salary by a certain percentage (Is it 7% now?) but the scheme is still non contributory in all respects.

Yes I know it's illogical but don't shoot me!

And actually in some places the grass IS a lot greener!! Well where I am anyways

:D :D :ok:

[Last call for Mr..]

I'm sorry, I've got to step in and support total war here. The grass is not greener. Yes 3% is disappointing as we could all do with more money. The total package is a good one if you stay in for long enough. My wife is a Dental Nurse and the treatment I have had, would have cost thousands of pounds as a private patient. Worth a lot more than 3%. The main problem is the general cost of living, stealth taxes, cost of food, running two cars etc. Lifestyle issues. The MOD is not a bad employer, at least not from my neck of the woods. Leave for the Dark Blue is laid down quite clearly in 2SLs PFS and if the standard is not reached then it is reported direct to 2SL. This is a key document that the Light Blue do not have but should. The next time your PLT comes around ask them why you do not have a similar "contract".

[lineslime]

Jess The Dog for El Presidente!:ok:

[JessTheDog]

The point about the "noncontributory" pension is correct but does not change the fact that the pension is most certainly not free!

One further thought - are the arguments against the Armed Forces having a representative body not similar to such arguments as those against allowing women in the block overnight, and against allowing an "open door" desk policy, namely that the Armed Forces cannot be trusted to act responsibly? I can see no other argument and, like the examples I mention above, such an argument is patronising tosh that demeans the committment of the men and women in uniform!

[The Gorilla]

Jess

I don't disagree with anything that you say, but those in charge of the Services see personnel as nothing more than servile expendables subject to military discipline. Any form of federation or association etc is viewed as mutinous, and will therefore never happen

It is as simple as it is unfair!


:ok:

[WorkingHard]

If it is all so bad why do you people stay for so long. Go where the grass is greener, take days off sick and not be paid (except for a generous £66.00 per week), try and get an indexed linked NON CONTRIBUTORY pension scheme, free or subsidised travel, subsidised meals, free work clothes - oh the list is endless. Yes if you really are very very good at what is wanted then the grass is greener so go on give it a try. Oh nearly forgot you wont get respect from the badges you wear, just from being the person you really are and no-one to hide behind.

[totalwar]

such arguments as those against allowing women in the block overnight Rubbish....which AF doesn't allow ladies in the block overnight. Certainly in my mess its positively encouraged.

[Maple 01]

indexed linked NON CONTRIBUTORY

OK, we'll go through this once again for the slow-witted

index linked? From age 55 and NOT before, so retiring after 22 years means your pension IS NOT index linked of the first 15 years

Non contributory? You're playing semantics here, while nothing is directly deducted from your pay it is taken into account when the pay review comes round so in effect you pay x% contributions as Gorilla pointed out.

[WorkingHard]

If it is semantics you want to play then please be careful. The index linking is paid from age 55 but backdated from the time the pension/retired pay was first awarded. So the pension is indeed indexed linked from date of retirement, it is just that you dont receive it until age 55.

[The Gorilla]

Maple

Working hard is correct. I am currently receiving my pension, which is frozen until I am 55. But each year it is index linked and goes up in value, it is just that I don't see that until I am 55!!

TG

[DP Harvey]

Your 1st contribution to this discussion:
Quote
"The 3% is a fair pay increase and I for one will gladly accept it in the little blue pay chit. Thank you TB and GH... lets have more during your next term of government"
Unquote

TW you then put a lot of work into your argument about how great it is to be in the Armed Forces, with all the enviable Terms of Service, etc, and I tend to agree with you, that its not bad.

Therefore, whatever anyone thinks about our existing Terms, the last thing that should be done is to erode it with pay increases that do not keep up with the cost of living. For example, there's absolutely no point in having 30 days leave (entitled or not) if I can't now afford to take the holiday I had 5 years ago.

Pay, and the annual raise, is supposed to maintain the status quo, not erode it.

[Thomas coupling]

I can't believe you lot are grateful for the 3% rise. It is barely above inflation. Take this into consideration when you're told you're worth it by the war office.
In reality, you got about .5% pay RISE for all your efforts.....................
PATHETIC AND AN INSULT TO YOUR INTELLIGENCE.

"Pay will remain derisory, until morale improves":sad:

[totalwar]

Of course we should be grateful. God forbid the tory party get in we may not get anything next year. The pay rise isn't compulsory, they didn't have to give us all a %3 pay rise. So I'll say thank you very much and skulk away back under my stone

[JessTheDog]

Of course we should be grateful. God forbid the tory party get in we may not get anything next year. The pay rise isn't compulsory, they didn't have to give us all a %3 pay rise. So I'll say thank you very much and skulk away back under my stone

To paraphrase a wretched red-top comic:

"Will the last person left in the UK Armed Forces turn off the light when they leave"

The goodwill and selflessness of the Armed Forces is being manipulated and taken for granted on a scale never seen before by a government that consists of shameless opportunists and liars who will screw anyone over and do anything to stay in power. I believe that Bliar should be certified as he clearly has a messianic personality disorder and is the most dangerous threat to this nation we have faced in years. Witness his shameless exaggeration over the terrorist threat, and his lies over the Iraq war!

I handed my kit in for a number of reasons but it boils down to trust - the political leadership of this nation can no longer be trusted, whether it is to treat the Armed Forces fairly and with dignity or whether it is to exercise judgement in resorting to the use of military force.

The silver lining to the cloud - Bliar will be kicked out in 3 months, when Labour scrape through with a majority of 20 or so. I have no major axe to grind with the Labour party as an organisation stretching back for a century and it has been responsible over those years for some innovative and far-reaching contributions to the political life of this nation. However, the current shower are institutionally dishonest - witness the shameless vote-rigging in Birmingham - and must be dispatched at the ballot box. Labour are genuinely hated by the population in this country, as demonstrated on Question Time and Any Questions each week and at the headteachers' conference recently where Ruth Kelly was heckled in a manner not seen for years. Hopefully in May we will wake up to a representative and balanced Parliament in which a dictator can no longer use a supine majority to push through dangerous and flawed legislation on a whim.

[16 blades]

TotalWar,

You, Sir, are a cock of the first order. Much like your alter-ego, Crossbow.

So I'll say thank you very much and skulk away back under my stone

Please do so.

16B

[The Gorilla]

Jess

Spot on, hear hear matey.

TG

[totalwar]

16 Blades...if you are not happy with your substantial pay rise then I'll have it.

If the only reason you are in the services (if indeed you are) is for money then Im sure you could find a job elsewhere which paid more. If however, you are in the services because its by far and away the best job you have ever had...then shut it!

[JessTheDog]

If however, you are in the services because its by far and away the best job you have ever had...then shut it!


Has that sentiment been emailed via a Blackberry at Labour HQ?

[OKOC]

Workinghard,

You are a bitter, jealous and uninformed T*AT- why don't YOU just take your crap thoughts elsewhere and stop trying to wind us hardworking servicemen up.

[WorkingHard]

OKOC - Is one to assume by your command of the Queen's English and rapier like thrust of reasoned argument you are:
1) In a clerical post and
2) Of the belief that all servicemen are hardworking?

[Jobza Guddun]

Pops out from cover...

"Rubbish....which AF doesn't allow ladies in the block overnight. Certainly in my mess its positively encouraged."

TW,

The RAF does not allow women into a male JRs block between 0000 and 0800. Socially that is. The relatively few mixed blocks obviously have slightly different rules.

At a number of places, JRs cannot even sign a female onto camp during those hours, some even extend that to officers.

Not really "rubbish".

Returns to cover....

[An Teallach]

TW

Your inability to distinguish between the terms "Block" and "Mess" makes me wonder whether you are in the mob at all.

Are you, perchance, posting from Millbank?

[JessTheDog]

The RAF does not allow women into a male JRs block between 0000 and 0800. Socially that is. The relatively few mixed blocks obviously have slightly different rules.

At a number of places, JRs cannot even sign a female onto camp during those hours, some even extend that to officers.


I have a distinct recollection of the rules being changed a couple of years ago in advance of HRA98, although I recall that it applied to single-occupant rooms and not to communal rooms. In any case, as a former block OiC (amongst other fun secondary duties), I can happily testify that a pragmatic blind eye was turned to what airmen (and airwomen) got up to in their own time in their own room.

I would hope that no unit continues to maintain the "old" policy, other than for communal rooms such as transit accommodation and for recruit training establishments. I'd be astonished if any camp tried to stop those not in blocks - ie SNCOs and officers - bringing ladies onto camp and even more surprised if such a policy was actually implemented successfully!

On another issue, if "productive" airmen and airwomen are actually living permanantly in communal rooms (on-Stn in the UK) in this day and age, the unit and the CO should hang their heads in shame!:mad:

[Jobza Guddun]

JTD

Last time I did Orderly Dog at a certain FJ base in Northern Scotland, no more than 4 years ago, NOBODY was allowed to sign females in after 0100. This policy was supervised by the RAFP using CCTV under threat of "disciplinary action". So it didn't happen on most peoples' stags, despite a number of significant attempts at bribery!! Just wasn't worth the hassle.

On the other hand, it was always a laugh to see some lovestruck young buck wanting to sign in this "top doris", who'd been in the previous 2 nights with 2 different guys!!

"On another issue, if "productive" airmen and airwomen are actually living permanantly in communal rooms (on-Stn in the UK) in this day and age, the unit and the CO should hang their heads in shame!"

At an FJ unit in Norfolk, JR's find themselves in a 32 man room for up to 6 weeks on arrival (long enough methinks). Daisys and shifties all in together with the obvious implications, and Cpls in there too. Know a few people currently in there. TMS male students live in portakabins, for up to 13 weeks.

In the last 3 years we have gone back 20 years as regards accommodation in a few locations.

[JessTheDog]

JG,

I would hope that the "northern FJ stn" has moved on post HRA 98! A disgraceful state of affairs - I've never had the pleasure of anything other than a brief visit and can't recall if the FQs are behind the wire, as they often are on flying stations; if so, that is clearly discriminatory.

At an FJ unit in Norfolk, JR's find themselves in a 32 man room for up to 6 weeks on arrival (long enough methinks).

This is a disgrace that makes a mockery of the SLAM programme. I know a certain Stn which had its SLAM programme cancelled by Strike prior to a major influx of personnel from another unit facing closure. The Strike command secretary visited on a VIP jolly but I bet that no-one had the b@lls to raise this stupid and spineless decision with the chief Strike bean-counting idiot. No-one should have to put up with this sort of situation and it will get worse as massive cuts have been made to the SLAM programme - nearly £30million has been cut, seen by yours truly in a MoD minute last summer. Some journo needs to be asking FoI questions on these accommodation issues - a few newspaper articles in the runup to the election would be welcome!

[Lee Jung]

Total War,

Are you, or have you been previously posting under the handle 'hyd3failure' and if so why have you changed?

The headline rate of inflation for the last quarter of 2004 was 3.5%. This is the true figure of inflation, taking into account tax rises and therefore a more accurate indication of the increase in cost of living. I don't know if this includes the cost of mortgage repayments though.

The upshot is we took a paycut in real terms this year fellas.

At least the nurses got 15% over 3 years. Announced the week before the AFPRB were due to report. Rumour has it this is why our announcement was delayed by a week.

Anyway, as the even moderately financially capable of us have realised the military salary has been declining in terms of purchasing power for years. Add to this that it looks like interest rates are going to be heading up soon (after the nation is hoodwinked into voting this soul-less party back in) and taxes will be going up in their normal stealthy manner to pay for the astronomical increase in public spending.

And a note to all, we don't receive a 'final salary' pension on the current AFPS, we receive a 'Representative Salary' Pension - It basically takes the mid-point of all of one rank and hey presto that is the representative base of that rank's pension.

The new scheme will be truly final salary.

Beware - The Civil Service is about to lose their FS pension with no recompense. My wife has done 15 years and could draw it at 60. Now she will not be able to draw it until 65 and it is based on a salary at the mid-point in her career, so the loss is serious.

This is the risk of a 'non-contributary' pension - it can be changed on a whim. Grandfather rights are a nice to have.

I agree with Hyd3TotalWarFailure on one point, we love the job and that's why we do it - for our satisfaction and for our fellow service-people, but I hope he would be honest enough to admit the fun is gradually seeping out. This is the major cause of complaint amongst the Senior Rates and Officers. No Jollies, no good foreign runs ashore, higher paperwork burden, knee-jerk management schemes.

Best idea I heard recently was that every officer should have to eat the paperwork s/he creates.

[BigginAgain]

JessTheDog

Why the Journos? There is absolutely no reason why you should not ask the question; you have exactly the same rights as any member of the public. Your answer should then be published here:

FOI Releases (http://www.mod.uk/publications/foi/rr/jan_mar05.htm)

where I am sure the Journos will read it.

As for the line about a certain FJ Base in Norfolk, I presume this situation has been eased by the move of the other group of people to which you refer, to Portakabin city (AKA TSLA AKA Camp X-Ray) Oop North? Or are you talking about Marham?

BA

[totalwar]

Block...?
Mess...? In my service the "Mess" is actually called the wardroom and the place we live is called the Block... here in Somerset our wardroom has 3 blocks...all named after famous Naval aircraft/ships AND starting with a letter of the compass...for instance... Wessex block is the westerly one. Eagle block is the Easterly one and can anyone guess which block is the southerly one????

And in my wardoom it is positively encouraged to allow girlfriends/wives boyfriends etc into the wardroom for overnight / weekend visits. A friend of mine lived in the wardroom with his girlfriend for 6 months.

Maybe the RAF should bring itself into the 21st Century.

[JessTheDog]

JessTheDog

Why the Journos? There is absolutely no reason why you should not ask the question; you have exactly the same rights as any member of the public.

Maybe I have already, and cynically believe that multiple requests in a similar vein are more likely to bear fruit quickly.

[lineslime]

LJ

Are you referring to the 10% raise over 3 years, effective from 2003 which has been delayed for some (3.225% this year which in real terms = pay cut). If this 15% over three years is to be believed then please tell me when it is effective from so I can tell Mrs Slime.