How Many to Manage 41,000

[Phoney Tony]

How big does the senior management need to be to run a business of about 41 000 people?
Post SDSR
How big does the senior management need to be to run a business of about 35 000 people?

A few FJ, AT, SH and ISTAR ac plus a few other odds and sods.
An even small number of stns than we now have.

Why 2 Gps?

[Bismark]

Post SDSR
How big does the senior management need to be to run a business of about 35 000 people?

Er more like 25000 possibly less

[Melchett01]

I guess it all depends by how you define senior management. If you compare the RAF to BA which also employs around 40,000 people, they have 11 directors / top level management according to the Investor Relations part of their website.

I'm guessing we have way more than 11 people in what you might consider to be director / top level managers.

[Red Line Entry]

Although to be fair, if you compare the overall wage bill for 'directors' between the RAF and BA, I think the RAF would work out considerably cheaper!

[Pontius Navigator]

Good question.

The comparison with BA is only relevant at the operational level. Many senior officers in the RAF are effectively outwith the RAF. I am thinking here of those senior officers in NATO or International appointments, in appointments in embassies throughout the world.

There could be an argument for transferring the establishment costs from the MOD to the Foreign Office. For those in International appointments the costs will no doubt fall to the MOD so these should be questioned - do we need an AVM in SHAPE responsible for WMD? Is this a true military appointment that is important to the MOD or is it of importance to the FCO?

At a lower level, do these International HQ need military personnel in the national support units or could they make do with a contracted staff?

[Tankertrashnav]

41,000 - 35,000 - 25,000? I'm finding it difficult to grasp these figures - what's the current strength (roughly) and are these projected figures? P-N do you happen to know what the strength was in the mid 60's? I seem to think it was well over 100,000 then. I do know there were 26 group captains at Changi when FEAF was there - more than one per squadron in theatre - so we were probably just as top heavy then, pro rata.

[Wholigan]

Don't know how accurate this is - but:

R.A.F. Manned Strength (Hansard, 2 July 1968) (http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/written_answers/1968/jul/02/raf-manned-strength)

[Rigga]

I seem to remember the RAF being about 180K in the 1970's.

Pontius makes the point of Embassy Staff - If the EU gets its way surely even they would be restricted to very few British "EU" Embassadorial posts?

And NATO posts might be replaced by "EDA" posts...

[Tankertrashnav]

Wholigan - that is just showing off!
.
Really impressed how quickly you came up with that link - thanks.

As I thought, over 120,000 in the period I was thinking about.

Still, we were still bearing the white man's burden then.

Oops :oh:

[Low Flier]

The number of Group Captains could certainly be trimmed.

By a lot!

[Mr C Hinecap]

A few FJ, AT, SH and ISTAR ac plus a few other odds and sods.

I take it you are one of the hallowed sky gods and are unaware of the Trades the other Branches have to manage to ensure we have capabilities beyond where the contractor will go to when we need to.

[minigundiplomat]

Those trades will be supporting one of those capabilities. They are crucial, just like the sky gods.

However, do the RAF Police need a Gp Capt and an Air Cdre? Will the world stop turning if trade sponsors drop from Air Rank/Gp Capt to Wg Cdr?

Could trade sponsors be combined a little more effectively than at present?

[TBM-Legend]

Let's go back to.

Sqn Ldr's running Squadrons.
Wg Cdr's running Wings
Gp Capt's running Groups etc.

Stick with that formula and delegate...

Top neddies down by 70%..

[Mr C Hinecap]

Could trade sponsors be combined a little more effectively than at present?

My Head of Branch carries out his role as an additional duty. My Branch Sponsor is a Sqn Ldr working to a Wg Cdr who covers 2 x (very large) Branches. The Trade Sponsors are WOs. Seems fairly reasonable.

[Red Line Entry]

TBM,

You'll find that the ground branches already have flt lts running flts (of up to 100 personnel), sqn ldrs running sqns and wg cdrs running wgs.

While I tend to agree that there is a degree of pruning (pruning, geddit?) that could reduce OF5s and above (and it'll be interesting to see if the 'Command Structure Review' that's ongoing at High Wycombe really makes deep cuts in senior officers), the cry to cut large swathes generally comes from those who have absolutely no idea of what they do - and therefore no understanding of the impact for the Service if they went. (long sentence - no wonder I was a 'C' at ISS!)

[Blighter Pilot]

PR10 already has us planned at 38500 before PR11 and SDSR:ok:

[Pontius Navigator]

TTN, IIRC it was 139,000 at the begining when I joined. There was a spilling of ..... skills in the late 60s with the demise of fleets such as Hastings, Argosy, Bassett, Beverley, Valiant, Javelin with a redundancy programme aimed at the non-FJ fraternity. It was quite swingeing with voluntary redundancies amongst aircrew with the exception of FJ crews, and compulsory redundancies for sqn ldr and above.

Some flt lt were promoted into the redundancy bracket just 6 months before the axe!

There was a further culling on Britannia crews and a reduction of assimilation in the late 70s and more redundancies in the early 90s. This time the mad axe man chopped out whole trade groups even when some of that trade were gainfully employed outside their trade - sim techs flying in the E3 for instance. IIRC the RAF strength at the start of his was 98,000 and slashed with the peace dividend and outsourcing to 57,000.

Although now only half the 1960s strength, which included a lot of national service make-weights, the 1990s strength was probably more effective in parts such as RAFG and Air Defence. AT could also lift more further, faster, and more safely. Maritime was vastly more effective being able to reach further and faster.

Cutting the RAF teeth even further would not necessarily lead to even greater loss of effectiveness. Already one FJ CAS aircraft can offer about a 75% chance of target destruction whereas in the 70s 4 Buccanneer could offer only a 40% chance of killing one tank.

[Pontius Navigator]

Let's go back to.

Sqn Ldr's running Squadrons.
Wg Cdr's running Wings
Gp Capt's running Groups etc.

Stick with that formula and delegate...

Top neddies down by 70%..

TBM, nice one, of course we did rank/post inflation back in the 50s and 60s to get a rough balance between pay and responsibility. Now, take a sqn of cheap fast jets, say GR4s. Place a value on the sqn for aircrew, ground crew and the hardware. Now what pay would a civilian organisation give to a department head with that size responsibility?

Tripple it for a wing. Add in the base support elements and double it for a station. You should now be in BIG money.

However lets stop about there. It was a joke in Maritime that St Mawgan had a Gp Capt in charge of a station with one squadron and he answered to an AVM an SouMar with that one sqn, who in turn answered to an AM at Group.

As almost all aircraft types are located on single bases lets retitle each base as a wing, commanded as you suggest by a wg cdr, aka OC EAW.

Now gather each similar role EAW into a group commanded by a group captain and all within a single command structure commanded by no higher than a 3-star. That way you would have the AFB and CAS senior and not equal to the RAF operational organisation.

But having downsized the ranks against the responsibility how would the pay-reward be equalised with private industry?

How about command pay? Pay all group captains at a flat rate of, say, £100k, but pay those few in command of groups an additional command pay of say £50k. Same rules as flying pay - you lose it if not in that appointment. You know that you get an extra £50k per year while you are the gp commander and will lose it when you are tourex.

But if you merit promotion to air cmdre your flat rate pay will be £150k; if not then you have a choice :}

Apply this command pay logic all the way down to sqn commanders - bonus in post, no loss of pay on promotion to the next higher rank, bonus if you get a further promotion or a new command post.

Oh well, one can dream.

[TBM-Legend]

Down Under we have Navy four bar Captains driving Frigates in many cases. The old war canoe Melbourne [ +15 aircraft+ 1400 sailors] had a Commodore while the USS Midway sailed by with 80+ air vehicles + 6000 sailors driven by a Captain [4 bar].....

top heaviness is the problem chaps. If you have the numbers then the command structure goes with it....

[philrigger]

;)

Slightly off topic

Although now only half the 1960s strength, which included a lot of national service make-weights

Am I correct in thinking that the last National Serviceman was discharged in December 1960?

Phil.

[light_my_spey]

What is the current Officer/Airman ratio just now?

[Yeller_Gait]

What is the current Officer/Airman ratio just now?

Not that long ago, it was somewhere near 2:1. I cannot imagine it has changed that much in the last 3 years or so.

Y_G

[goudie]

last National Serviceman

philrigger The last one was discharged in May '63

I had a couple of the last RAF National Servicemen in my Servicing team at RAF Bassingbourn. They were good technical guys and did a good job but boy were they disgruntled at being the last in.

[SirPercyWare-Armitag]

Don't forget:

To look at reducing the number of senior officers, the standard MOD policy is to set up a One-Star Steering Group........................:E

[Pontius Navigator]

;)

Slightly off topic



Am I correct in thinking that the last National Serviceman was discharged in December 1960?

Phil.

No. Our educator in 1962 was NS. Our batman in mid 1963 was NS. He had a marvellous job and did a marvellous job too. He was in a barrack block with 16 single rooms. He brought us morning tea. Cleaned the rooms, polished shoes, pressed uniforms and kept his head down with no one bothering him.

[whowhenwhy]

Kitbag, that's the point. The problem is not with the Service as such, just our lords and masters persistence with all-commissioned front-crew. If the Israeli's and probably a large number of our European allies (of similar size) can cope with one 3/4* equivalent, then cascade down from there, why the he'll can't we?

[kiwi grey]

The old war canoe Melbourne [ +15 aircraft+ 1400 sailors] had a Commodore while the USS Midway sailed by with 80+ air vehicles + 6000 sailors driven by a Captain [4 bar].....

And a current Nimitz class CVN will be driven by one USN Captain and have another on board as CAG. So that's two four-bars to command ~4500 personnel and ~100 front-line combat aircraft.

[RumPunch]

KitBag ,

Where are them figures available for use.

Current manning gives about 40k strength, current officer core gives us just over 10k , thats a quarter of all troops in the RAF are commisioned.
I know we can all use figures and change the view on things , thats what has made the officer bretheren last so long. but 1 officer for 4 airmen sounds a bit better. 20 years earlier things were so different.

I am glad in a way that finally we are going to loose numbers at the top as the RAF has had it coming for a long time. Justice maybe but its the only way to preserve the RAF for the future.

[Pontius Navigator]

RP. in 1990 the then AirSec said the aircrew cadre would reduce to 1,000 officers. While that figure may have excluded some categories such as senior officers, even at 57k the aircrew cadre would represent 1:56. If the strength dropped to 41k and the aircrew cadre remained at 1,000 (it won't) that is still 1:40.

So what branches change that ratio to 1:4?

In 1962, on a training unit, we had a Senior Technical Officer (Sqn Ldr), a Senior Admin Officer (Sqn Ldr), Stn Adjt (Flt Lt GD), an accountant, a caterer and a junior Admin Officer. We had a couple of educators and that was about it - a tail of about 6 non-aircrew officers.

Most flights were commanded by FS and WOs. The tail was not banded into sqns.

Now that was a long time ago, I was in training and not best placed to learn these details, but I think it was pretty close to the truth.

True we had one Group responsible for training pilots and another for training navigators. Both groups were in Flying Training Command so a lot of top weight there. However there was a robust external examination system from staff college all the way to training school exams.

[The B Word]

What is the current Officer/Airman ratio just now?

From November 2009:

Air Cdre and above 130
Gp Capt 330
Wg Cdr 1,230
Sqn Ldr 2,540
Flt Lt and below 4,260
Officers total 8,480
Required Strength 8,670

WO 1,210
CT/FS 3,180
Sgt 6,210
Cpl 8,370
SAC and below 11,930
Other ranks total 30,900
Required Strength 32,190


I make that an actual officer to OR ratio of 1:3.64 or the requirement is 1:3.71.

The figures above from Hansard show that we are 30 air ranks overborne, as well as 40 Gp Capts, 100 Wg Cdrs, 120 Sqn Ldrs but 560 Flt Lts and below underborne. Therefore, the officer cadre is net underborne by 190.

For the ORs we have 130 too many WOs, manning balance for CT/FS, 400 too few Sgts, 270 too few Cpls and 730 too few SACs and below. Therefore, OR cadre is net underbourne by 1,290.

On the officers side, this is why there are only 28 Wg Cdrs being promoted this year (45 last year) when the "norm" was around 65. The same for Sqn Ldrs where there are about 68 this year, compared to about 120 being promoted in a normal year.

The ORs are also "top heavy" at the WO level - this is also why it is so hard for guys/gals to get their MACR. However, if you're new to the RAF the chances to advance to Cpl and then Sgt are better than normal.

Finally, as has already been said, we need Sqn Ldrs/Wg Cdrs to fill the miriad of NATO/Overseas jobs that require equivalency in post. Often, if we fill it with an under-ranked indivdual we lose out in NATO as other countries are soooo very rank conscious. Also, as I understand it, we are over-borne on non-aircrew Sqn Ldrs and Wg Cdrs and Gp Capts but have less aircrew-types - hence the FRI for aircrew Sqn Ldrs.

I hope that all makes sense (apologies if some of my numbers don't add up - too many beers last night!).

The B Word:ok:

PS. I believe that there is about 8-10% of the RAF that makes up Aircrew Cadre - I believe it is about 50 Gp Capts, 150 Wg Cdrs, 350 Sqn Ldrs and about 1,200 Flt Lts. On top of that about 260 MACR (from DASA site), about 400 FS and 800 Sgts (of the "plastic" NCO variety!). About 3% of these are female (from the DASA site). About 3,200 to 3,500 (max) in total.

[Lima Juliet]

B Word

I believe that there might be a few more Wg Cdrs in the Flying Branch than 150 - here's why:

Here are a list of Sqns from 2009 with Wg Cdr Bosses:

1 Sqn
II (AC) Sqn
3 Sqn
4 Sqn
5 (AC) Sqn
8 Sqn
9 Sqn
11 Sqn
12 Sqn
13 Sqn
14 Sqn
18 Sqn
22 Sqn
24 Sqn
27 Sqn
28 Sqn
30 Sqn
31 Sqn
32 (The Royal) Sqn
33 Sqn
39 Sqn
43 Sqn
47 Sqn
51 Sqn
70 Sqn
78 Sqn
99 Sqn
100 Sqn
101 Sqn
111 Sqn
120 Sqn
201 Sqn
202 Sqn
216 Sqn
230 Sqn
617 Sqn

That's 36 Wg Cdrs without counting OC Ops Wg and the 22Gp CFIs and Sqn Cdrs. Therefore, let's call it 56 with at least 15 per yr in staff college. On top of that, there are HQ posts and also MoD. I would expect it to be closer to 300.

On the Gp Capt front, there are about 25 stations with Gp Capts. So again the number of aircrew Gp Capts is probably closer to 100. I seem to remember that there was about a 1 in 3 chance of making Gp Capt from Wg Cdr (in very rough maths!).

So I would expect that the total aircrew are closer to 4,000(max) than 3,500. That would then be about 10%, which again I believe is correct and about right.

In my opinion, we have too many penguin senior officers that stemmed from their bleating that all the top jobs went to aircrew - well the RAF is all about flying, so go figure!

LJ :cool:

PS. And before you say "But O'leary isn't a pilot" (RyanAir), well he also doesn't run a Service, he runs a business, and that's a BIG difference! By the way, Willie Walsh is a pilot, as is Jim French of FlyBE (who is doing VERY well at present).

[Tankertrashnav]

So from the last two posts I make it that's 3.6 air officers per squadron! We're fond of saying that the navy's got more admirals than ships - seems like the RAF's no better!

[Kitbag]

LJ, reinforcing your argument, there's at least 3 Reserve sqns missing: 15, 41, 54. Probably others too.

As for your comments re Walsh and French, don't think they are surrounded by pilot types, indeed looking at the Board structures they are built of men and women who are specialists in their role: lawyers, accountants, personnel strategists. People who have been trained to lead large organisations to success.

[Grabbers]

For what it's worth, I think we need leaders, not managers.

[AARON O'DICKYDIDO]

I found the following in Wiki.

National Service ended on 31 December 1960, but those who had deferred service for reasons such as university studies or on compassionate or hardship grounds still had to complete their National Service after this date. It had also previously been decided that only those born up to 1 October 1939 were to be called up. The last man called up for National Service, Private Fred Turner of the Army Catering Corps, was discharged on 7 May 1963. However, the last National Serviceman was Lieutenant Richard Vaughan of the Royal Army Pay Corps, who was discharged six days later on 13 May 1963. When National Service ended, some men continued serving voluntarily.

Obviously those that continued to serve after their NS became regulars by default.

[RumPunch]

B Word

Thanks , I knew that data was out there, ok im not exactley bang on with 1 officer for every 4 airmen but damm close.

I just cant beleive that even now the RAF is trimming looking towards the SDR and making cuts now , all the people that are not getting kept are the people who are hands on and make the RAF what it is. Most folk dont give a **** anymore from poor leadership, the RAF from the top does not show leadership , just care for ones job and a pension to follow. they have failed thousands and I hope the government yeilds that axe. There will be many happy people post October

[Pontius Navigator]

AARON, thank you. Certainly our batman was no undergrad but serving his time. IIRC one of the NS docs at ITS in 1961 was also using us for research as he was heavily in to EEG.

You could tell the NS officers, and RAFVR(T) as they wore hairy blues whereas the regulars wore barathea.

[Pontius Navigator]

AARON, thank you. Certainly our batman was no undergrad but serving his time. IIRC one of the NS docs at ITS in 1961 was also using us for research as he was heavily in to EEG.

You could tell the NS officers, and RAFVR(T) as they wore hairy blues whereas the regulars wore barathea.

[Roland Pulfrew]

there's at least 3 Reserve sqns missing: 15, 41, 54. Probably others too.

And 19, 42, 45, 54, 56 and 208

[Kitbag]

For what it's worth, I think we need leaders, not managers.Absolutely 100% behind that; the elephant in the room is that the whole system for identifying, developing and promoting those leaders seems to have failed totally if the comments on this thread and many others are to be given any credence.

Far too many criticisms, perhaps justified, perhaps not, have been laid against the senior echelons leading to dissatisfaction and distrust

[Wensleydale]

But who would sign off on overseas t & s if we got rid of too many senior officers?:ugh:

[Jabba_TG12]

I wonder what you'd make of this comment then Kitbag, taken from the Telegraph...

"A senior officer said: "All we have had from the new defence secretary are hints and sideswipes at the military. We have troops fighting and dying on operations and unless some direction and leadership, rather than the constant regurgitation of how bad things are within the military, some troops will legitimately ask 'what's the point' when their future is in doubt." "


The direction and leadership was meant to come from the senior officers, is it not?

Royal Navy and RAF will bear brunt of multi-billion pound defence cuts - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/journalists/sean-rayment/7908487/Royal-Navy-and-RAF-will-bear-brunt-of-multi-billion-pound-defence-cuts.html)

[The B Word]

OK, to put some more fact into the debate I have just looked at the 2010 RAF List and there are 1,273 Wg Cdrs :eek:

However, just 388 are aircrew, with 191 pilots and 197 WSO (Navs, AEOs and LMs). So there are 885 "other branch" Wg Cdrs.

I then considered that there were the following (thanks for corrections):

46x Wg Cdr Squadrons:
1 Sqn
II (AC) Sqn
3 Sqn
4 Sqn
5 (AC) Sqn
8 Sqn
9 Sqn
11 Sqn
12 Sqn
13 Sqn
14 Sqn
15(R) Sqn
18 Sqn
22 Sqn
24 Sqn
27 Sqn
28 Sqn
29(R) Sqn
30 Sqn
31 Sqn
32 (The Royal) Sqn
33 Sqn
39 Sqn
41(R) Sqn
42(R) Sqn
45(R) Sqn
47 Sqn
51 Sqn
54(R) Sqn
55(R) Sqn
56(R) Sqn
72(R) Sqn
78 Sqn
92(R) Sqn
99 Sqn
100 Sqn
101 Sqn
111 Sqn
120 Sqn
201 Sqn
202 Sqn
208(R) Sqn
216 Sqn
230 Sqn
617 Sqn
RAFAT

20x Aircrew Wg Cdr OC Ops or Stn Cdrs:
RAF Wittering
RAF St. Mawgan
RAF Spadeadam
RAF Odiham
RAF Cranwell
RAF Coningsby
RAF Waddington
RAF Northolt
RAF Marham
RAF Benson
RAF Brize Norton
RAF Cottesmore
RAF Shawbury
RAF Lyneham
RAF Leeming
RAF Linton-on-Ouse
RAF Kinloss
RAF Leuchars
RAF Lossiemouth
RAF Valley

I then considered CFIs and there are at least another 4, making a total of 70x aircrew Wg Cdr posts. Add the PJOBs of Akrotiri, Gibraltar and MPA plus the EAWs that makes another 10 then that makes 80. Considering there is a Wg Cdr in a ground tour waiting for a Command Tour and an equal number in ground tours after a Command Tour, then that totals 240 required.

That makes an excess of 138 Wg Cdrs left - but there are Aircrew required Wg Cdr posts in HQs such as JHC, Air Command (1,2 and 22Gp), PJHQ, MOD, ETPS and CFS. Plus NATO, Air Attache, exchange posts and OOA postings.

So is 388 too many? - probably not. Unless you fancy a non-aircrew type stumbling about in an aircrew specialised post, which is exactly why the Wg Cdr branch no longer has "GD Any" monicker attached to it.

One thing I do know, is that there are an awful lot of Controllers,Coppers and Rock Ape Wg Cdrs (ie. OSB) in posts outside of specialisation :*

The B Word

[Wyler]

And a fair number of aircrew stumbling about in areas they know f*ck all about. So I guess that balances it out old chap. :ok:

[Phoney Tony]

The B Word,

206(R) Sqn is alive and well at RAF Boscomb Down.

There are also wg cdrs in the various staff trg establishments , loads in MoD, too many engineers in DE&S and some in Dstl.

[Mr C Hinecap]

Unless you fancy a non-aircrew type stumbling about in an aircrew specialised post, which is exactly why the Wg Cdr branch no longer has "GD Any" monicker attached to it.

s'funny. Another view is that it was all a bit difficult finding out the non-aircrew types were actually very capable and doing better in some previously aircrew posts and it was upsetting the order of things. So we revert to job protection to ensure survival of the species.

[RumPunch]

2010 RAF List and there are 1,273 Wg Cdrs http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/eek.gif



Bloody hell , here lies the problem why we are in such a terrible shape

[500days2do]

Can you see the cull ever happening though ?

The problem has always been to many managers...even at Sqn level...

Why the need for promotion lists every year....as ground crew we had guys with up to 10 years seniority before getting promotion...the officer cadre is just a gravy train...hence the top end is stuffed with oxygen thieves who have no idea how things should be done....

5d2d

[cornish-stormrider]

so those of you who are fekked off with it can reach for the black and yellow JPA handle marked PVR, await the sdr and get shafted or put up and shut up.

Where I am working now has had it's turnover multiply by a factor of 5 (nearly 6) in four years.

Jobs are out there and I for one wouldn't stay in with the situation like it is - I guess the last line in the Arrsepedia will come true - have a look...

[Lima Juliet]

500days to do

Why the need for promotion lists every year....as ground crew we had guys with up to 10 years seniority before getting promotion...the officer cadre is just a gravy train...hence the top end is stuffed with oxygen thieves who have no idea how things should be done....


The average seniority of Flt Lts promoted to Sqn Ldr is about 7 years and to Wg Cdr is 7 years as well - I've never seen a Sqn Ldr promoted to Wg Cdr without less than 4.5 years seniority, as they need a minimum of 2 reports in their staff tour and then a minimum of 2 reports in their command tour (usually as a front line Flight Commander in charge of 15 or so Fg Offs and Flt Lts). Promotion is rarely immediate, hence the 4.5 year figure, and these are the individuals that usually make into Air Rank.

I hope that informs your opinion a little better on the officer cadre "gravy train", and yes, they have to be boarded just like SAC to Cpl, Cpl to Sgt, Sgt to CT, CT to FS and FS to WO. The yearly promotion lists for ORs are the same as Officers - so I guess that's the need for a yearly promotion lists. Also, in the past 2 years, the aircrew Flt Lt to Sqn Ldr list has been about 70 officers (prior to that it has been about 120) and the Sqn Ldr to Wg Cdr was 45 in 2009 and expecting 28 in 2010 (usually about 60-65 in previous years). The majority of the promotees were "A-" or above with "High" reccomendations for promotion - this is awarded on merit and performance (not a gravy train), just like that for ORs.

Mr C Hinecap

Another view is that it was all a bit difficult finding out the non-aircrew types were actually very capable and doing better in some previously aircrew posts and it was upsetting the order of things.

I guess the buzz-word here is "some previously aircrew posts" - the majority of aircrew annotated posts are done well by aircrew, so why, oh why, would we want to take a gamble and put non-aircrew into them? Just like you wouldn't want an aircrew mate running BSW or FSW; I'm pretty sure some aircrew officers could be "actually very capable and do better" in some of these posts, as well. In my opinion it is "horses for courses" and therefore "aircrew for flying related jobs" and "penguins for penguin related jobs" - simples!

LJ:ok:

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

LJ,

Reading your post confirms what many of us have known for quite a while now, were doomed :(

[The B Word]

Thanks Phoney Tony

That makes the numbers even more justified.

Out of interest, the Navy should have 1140 Cdrs, the Army 1770 Lt Cols and the RAF 1200 Wg Cdrs. Seeing as the Navy and RAF are roughly the same magnitude of size then we are probably "about" right. The Army are quite rightly less top heavy as they send the majority of their ORs out to fight, so their Rank structure is different, whereas the RAF send the majority of their SNCO/Officers out to fight (discounting the Regt Gunners).

25% saving = 900 Wg Cdrs

Again, probably about right if we go down to the rumoured 30,000ish mark. That could be achieved by keeping the lower promotion quotas, no continuance past 55 and natural wastage via PVR within in about 3 years. According to DASA stats the officer outflow is about 3%, so that's 36 Wg Cdrs per year. If we also go for "harsher rules" for promotion and continued service at 55, then this could easily be close to a 100-per-year correction.

Then the Govt/HM Treasury are off the hook and wouldn't have to find a collosal amount of redundancy money.

The B Word

[Pontius Navigator]

Just like you wouldn't want an aircrew mate running BSW or FSW; I'm pretty sure some aircrew officers could be "actually very capable and do better" in some of these posts, as well.

Actually in days of yore OC Admin was frequently an aircrew wg cdr. It was a good pre-cursor to his own station. Equally the Station Adjutant was a post for a senior, usually Cranwell, flt lt and a pre-cursor to a sqn ldr command tour. By keeping aircrew in cockpits they actually limit early command experience.

[The B Word]

PN

Couldn't agree more...:D

The B Word

[Wrathmonk]

The biggest failing of the officer promotion system is that individuals get promoted regardless of whether a job is available for them. Hence you (used to?) get the daft situation of individuals being promoted to wg cdr half way through staff college. Why not run the board, release the list and then promote when a job requiring an individual becomes available (which is, I believe, how the Navy and Army lists work). That way seniority actually means something - the date you put the rank up reflects the date you actually start the job and also gets rid of the 'overanked' posts where people have too much rank for the post they are filling. It also stops individuals being forced into a job that they clearly don't have the 'skill sets' for just because it needs a person of their rank. And please tell me the ruling of three years as acting and you automatically got substantive is no longer in force.....

And whilst I'm putting the world to rights why not introduce an 'up or out' policy (as I believe the USAF have). Stop all the 'bed blockers' who are bouncing between departments in Air Command as a 10+ year seniority sqn ldr or wg cdr (with no desire to go any further or to return to the front line) just to keep the educational allowance (and I know this will reopen the flying pay / reserve band / loss of flying pay discussion but we haven't had that argument on PPRuNe for at least a few weeks:E)

A bit of thread drift I fear - apologies!

[Pontius Navigator]

Wrath, that may be true but it is not what I have seen.

The old rules, pre-Hodgekinson, was the biennial promotion on 1 Jan/1 Jul followed by an immediate posting - no warning and no consideration of wife of.

This changed to the blue letter system where they know they will almost certainly get a posting within months to the new post. No promotion until posted. Wife of can now make spending plans, carpets, curtains etc.

That your wg cdr gets promoted on course may be a quirk of the system.

[Party Animal]

Wrath,

"And whilst I'm putting the world to rights why not introduce an 'up or out' policy (as I believe the USAF have). Stop all the 'bed blockers' who are bouncing between departments in Air Command as a 10+ year seniority sqn ldr or wg cdr (with no desire to go any further or to return to the front line) just to keep the educational allowance"

Bit too simplistic a statement I'm afraid. The US military do have an up or out system that obviously works for them. It means a continuous fresh flow of people through the system and good promotion chances (i.e, 95% make SO2 level and 80% make SO1 level) but on the downside, experience levels overall are very low. I have yet to find an aviator with 4,000 hrs flying experience. Pension costs are relatively high too with a typical outflow of officers at the 20 year point with an SO1 pension. Good for the individual but maybe not so good for the UK MOD Defence Budget.

As for the ‘bed blockers’, during my time in AIR, the obvious ones were relatively few – the same ones who desert dodge incidentally. The reality is that there are lots of jobs that need to be filled at HWY and someone has to do them. Therefore, it’s easy to stay put in one place if that’s your bag. Many of those sqn ldr / wg cdrs would really like to go further but if you haven’t made SO1 by the age of 44, it isn’t going to happen – regardless of how hard you work. An average 37 old with potential will always be promoted ahead of the exceptional 44 year old, which is another issue with our system.

Many of those individuals would also love to go back to the FL but again the system prevents this. Generally, you will get one sqn ldr flt cdr tour and that’s it. If you make it to sqn boss, then great. If not – your flying is over, bar the very few who are accepted for PA spine. The last PA board had just 2 sqn ldrs accepted for PA from the 50+ who applied. The bottom line is that they are needed by the ‘system’ to fill all those crap staff jobs at places like AIR which brings you back to all those 10+ year seniority dudes bouncing between departments!

[AED24]

PA - ty, a good post, logical and well explained. Aside from the comparison between representatives of other services and nations, I would be very interested to know the general criteria that is used to justify the need for the very many Group Captains and above in the RAF.

[Seldomfitforpurpose]

Or even why it's deemed essential for so many of our senior folk to be pilots :confused:

[Wrathmonk]

No promotion until posted

Not quite true I'm afraid. Whilst you may get a heads up from the deskie that you're above 'the line' the blue letters often don't come out until 4-6 weeks prior to 1 Jan / 1 Jul. Regardless of whether you have a posting or not the rank goes up on whichever list (ie Jan or Jul) you are on.

I have yet to find an aviator with 4,000 hrs flying experience

I appreciate you are brobably taling about the USAF, and may mean fast jet aviator, but the RAF have plenty of truckies / maritime / RW that have >4000hrs (and not all SNCO's either;)). The Spec Air / PAS is there to keep the experience for the front line. As for the up or out policy I'm not saying >2 years in rank and you're out but 8 years+. The problem is you can be promoted to sqn ldr at, say, 28 (not uncommon) and be guaranteed a job for the next 27 years without having to make any effort at all. That cannot be right or sensible (and I suspect is being used and abused during this economic 'down turn'). You will have repaid your training costs and can, if you wish, PVR at 6/12 months notice. So why shouldn't MOD have the option to do the same (call it an admin discharge perhaps:E). How does it work for the non-commissioned side?

The job for life is a thing of the past. Perhaps making the break points (including optional ones) to be a two way process, i.e you can leave or can be asked to leave, is the way forward. The size the RAF will be reducing to does not have enough 'fat' in the system for bed blockers, desert dodgers etc.

[Pontius Navigator]

Wrath, I have noticed that posting often precedes promotion. The lucky receipient gets acting paid and then becomes substantive at the magic date.

[glad rag]

Quote:
Post SDSR
How big does the senior management need to be to run a business of about 35 000 people?
Er more like 25000 possibly less

Always predictable, always full of spiteful S**T, why don't you just go away and come back when you're an adult. :ugh:

In case you haven't noticed, which is entirely probable considering your obvious detachment from reality, even here on PPRuNe, there is already a hardening of inter-service ranks over the s**tstorm facing the current armed forces of today.

Grow up.

[The B Word]

Wrath Monk

There is also one other fact that needs to be considered. A 10+ year Sqn Ldr is cheaper than a 28yr old Sqn Ldr.:eek:

If after your 38/16 point, 18/40 point or 22/44 point you don't draw your pension then you can subtract your pension from your wage for "actual" net cost to the taxpayer.

For example, a level 1 Sqn Ldr earns £47,760.48pa (w/o Flying Pay) a Level 10 earns £57,199.56pa (w/o Flying Pay). However, if the level 10 is past their pension point then HM Paymaster General does not have to pay the Sqn Ldr's pension of £14995 - therefore, net cost of the Level 10 Sqn Ldr is £42,204.56pa (w/o Flying Pay) if past AFPS75 16/38 point. If past the AFPS75 22/44 point then you can subtract £19,217 - net wage per year is £37,982.56.

Now, that certainly meets the HM Treasury mantra of "Value For Money"!!!

By the way, they stopped giving out Blue Letters about 2-3 years ago, and also the Valedictory Certificate at age 55...:{

The B Word:ok:

[kilomikedelta]

The Peter Principle observes that most people are promoted to their level of incompetence. If all military officers were demoted to their level of competence, what would the numbers look like?

[Wrathmonk]

PN

acting paid and then becomes substantive at the magic date

All the more reason to abandon this two dates per year only. It then works both ways - if there is a job for you, great - go do it, get paid for it and have the seniority. If there isn't a job yet, but you're 'on the list' - bad luck. Wait your turn, don't get paid, don't put the rank up until you move to the new job. Trouble is what to do with those who get pulled to acting rank despite being 'below the line' (and never get above it;)), hence my comment about the 3 year acting, automatic substantive ......

B Word

You should be in RP with views like that! Perhaps if we only recruited people over the age of 35 we would have to pay less in pension contributions and salary! Make them work to 80 as well .....! (If RP are reading this - it's a joke!!!!).

By blue letter I should have also said 'including the modern JPA format'! :*

[163627]

Party Animal

"The bottom line is that they are needed by the ‘system’ to fill all those crap staff jobs at places like AIR which brings you back to all those 10+ year seniority dudes bouncing between departments!"

I thought the point of an air force was to project "air power" not position papers and briefing notes; in an organisation with ever fewer real bits of kit I'm sure lots of these "crap staff jobs" could go. Remember Parkinson's Laws!

[F.O.D]

wrathmonk

although it is some time since I was involved with PMA, it was not the case that 3 years of acting rank automatically led to substantive promotion. Whilst you needed 3 years in acting rank to qualify for the full associated pension for that rank, there were (rare) cases where personnel never achieved the substantive rank.

regards F.O.D

[Party Animal]

163627,

Wouldn't argue with you fella, but you will always need some organisation that looks after governance, safety, training, planning etc., for those relatively few and precious expensive assets that we will have left after SDSR.

[Paul Chocks]

As an aside, B Word, your comments regarding pensions are misleading and assume a 55 yr old Sqn Ldr retiring would draw the same pension as the 38 yr old. Not true! Money still has to be invested for the serving officer (even though it probably isn't!).

If you go to a financial investment calculator and look at how much you need to invest to guarantee (well hope for!) a certain return you will be gobsmacked.

As an example, as a retired Sqn Ldr (at 38 point), for me to achieve the same level of pension at 65 that I would have had I stayed in and retired at 55 (without promotion) would require that I invest every single penny of my mil pension, and even then the return is not guaranteed. Do not underestimate your pension - it is phenomenal!

[The B Word]

Paul Chocks

I don't disagree that it's a phenominal pension.

From the Armed Forces Benefits Calculator it says that a Sqn Ldr's pension is an investment of about £20k per year, which actually makes our wages quite reasonable (certainly on a par with civvy street).

Sadly, the flaw in your argument is that regardless if you're a Level 1 or a Level 9 Sqn Ldr, the contribution is still going to be about £20k per year. The only difference in my argument is that if you don't take your pension at an Immediate Pension Point, then the taxpayer doesn't have to pay a pension and thus they can offset it against the serving Sqn Ldr's wages.

Here are some illustrations:

In a year a 28 year old Level 1 Sqn Ldr costs the taxpayer £47,760.48pa + £20k for the pension contribution + allowances = Net £67,760.48

In a year a 38+ year old Level 9 Sqn Ldr costs the taxpayer £57,199.56pa + £20k for the pension + allowances, plus the HM Paymaster General does not have to pay the Sqn Ldr's pension of £14995 = Net £62,204.56

If the Sqn Ldr has been 'bed blocking' as Wrath Monk puts it and goes past the 22/44 point then a 44+ year old Level 9 Sqn Ldr costs the taxpayer £57,199.56pa + £20k for the pension + allowances, plus the HM Paymaster General does not have to pay the Sqn Ldr's pension of £19,217 = Net £57,982.56

A saving of £10,220 per year!

I just wanted to illustrate that "bed blocking" might not be such a bad thing after all! In my opinion a 28 year old Sqn Ldr couldn't possibly have seen enough service to act at that Rank - in my day, you needed to do 3 tours before being competitive for getting picked up. Which for a direct entrant was about age 30-31 and for "green shielder" University entrant was about 34 (I was picked up to Sqn Ldr at age 35).

I hope I have made things a little clearer? :ok:

The B Word

PS. I don't work in Air RP, I am past my 38/16 point and I am on Level 2 of my current Rank - so I don't see myself as a "bed blocker" just yet! But I do believe I offer better value for money than a young whipper snapper at the same level :ok:

[ProM]

Leaders vs Managers


Front Line vs staff jobs

The current situations is that a lot of jobs in procurement, training, safety etc are taken by serving personnel (from all services).
So we need leaders AND managers, staff AND front line

What does tend to get forgotten is that no-one believes that the training and experience that civilian project & programme managers get qualifies them to fly fast jets. But somehow we have the situation that people who are trained to fly fast jets/command ships/lead battalions etc are assumed to have the qualifications and experience to manage complex programmes.

Just a thought

[orgASMic]

Perhaps the solution to the 'bed blockers' is to hold an inverse promotion board for officers with 10+ yrs in their present rank. The blokes who score worst are first for the chop when the time comes.

Once the SDSR has determined the size and shape of the RAF, their Airships will have to determine the structure and tailor the staff accordingly. Manning will then have to work out how many of each trade and branch is required. The excess in each should then be trimmed by compulsory redundancies for the 'bed blockers' identified in the inverse promotion board. This gets the size of the RAF going down immediately whilst the fine detail is thrashed out.

There will be no money for redundancy packages so the blokes getting the bad news should get paid off as if they had served to age 55, so that they get the lump sum and pension they had banked on. This way, they will go a little more quietly than they might have done and the ambulance chasers will not be able to cry that their clients have been disadvantaged by being let go early.

[Grimweasel]

Has anyone actually seen the FCO direction on this yet? What are the FCO strategic assumptions that the MoD is grounding the SDSR on? Or is the Treasury imposing the budgetary cut first and then we are supposed to base our Foreign Strategy on the budget available - a very dangerous way to go about business?!

I would be interested to see the FCO direction - after all if they deem it worthy to scale back on certain 'intervention' activities then how much need do we have for deep strike or an airborne brigade? This all smacks of the 1930's pre-war years to me. We are posturing our forces for world without inter-state conflict - could there be a step departure from conventional forces and a new Cyber-War brigade set up to battle adversaries over the cyber-space? After all, one only needs a laptop and a connection to bring down a countries national grid these days, not fleets of bombers??

[VinRouge]

You could argue that China have already won without fighting a single battle. Their strategic currency reserves and holdings could easily topple the US if they liquidated assets overnight with little care for the market; it would be horific as asset prices would explode.

Nope, no need for an armed force; the east has beaten the west as a society and will take its mantle as the global hegemony over the next 2 decades. The best we can hope for is less world policeman and more about shaping the landscape to cope with the lack of resources the scourge of global overpopulation will bring.

The East got our cash, wealth and assets. We got tat in return; cheap TVs, toys and branded consumerist clothing whilst we sold ourselves out to the banks, all the while inept labour government sat back and watched consumer debt spiral to well over 100% GDP over 13 years of complete mismanagement.

We are truly *cked.

[Grimweasel]

Yep- couldn't agree more VinRouge - a war fought by cheap exports and debt!

One could offer a counter argument that the Chinese need our (the West’s) ability to absorb their exports to remain solvent - that is until such time that the domestic market reaches sufficient levels of middle-class stature to be able to support the nation.

With this comes the increased drain and risks to the environment due to more people in the world wishing for the same standards of living. For example, it takes over 1000 litres of fresh water to produce a single kg of beef. If all the rice eating Chinese suddenly switch to a high protein meat laden diet then the world is screwed!! The Chinese are all over Africa scouring the world for resources to support their increasing middle classes - Kenya, Rhodesia etc are all doing deals and draining the continent. The shift has already begun....

[Wrathmonk]

hold an inverse promotion board for officers with 10+ yrs in their present rank. The blokes who score worst are first for the chop when the time comes

Been tried before in previous redundancy tranches but unfortunately you have to ask for volunteers as well - volunteers (should) automatically go to the top of the list. As bad as the economy may be at the moment there may still be the 'good guys' who wish to leave whilst those you would rather get rid of hang on to their job for life.

It may well be the lack of a generous redundancy settlement (i.e nothing more than the statutory minimum as per many other companies that have gone under in the recent months and years) will deter volunteers and the inverse board could work this time round. And anyone employing a lawyer to seek more than this minimum redundancy package will, IMHO, be wasting their money (and I suspect the "no win no fee" brigade will steer well clear of these sorts of cases).

I fear there are going to be a lot of unhappy people about in the early part of next year. Particularly those who hold a view that "there is no need to save for tomorrow as I have a job for the next 17 years". How long is the council house waiting list these days .....?

[Grimweasel]

Ministry of Defence | Defence News | People In Defence | Royal Navy officer rises up the Pink List (http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/PeopleInDefence/RoyalNavyOfficerRisesUpThePinkList.htm)

The mind boggles? Why does the MoD feel the need to even advertise this sort of thing? I really don't get this - I thought everyone was now equal? If so, why even highlight this sort of thing? And here we are in the middle of a Defence Review?? I wonder how much this cost the MoD in terms of wages/time wasted etc?? Last one out turn off the lights....

[Paully617]

hi all,
I have to admit that i havent read every post on this thread so please excuse me if i repeat stuff!!!

I agree with the Top End Job Culling!!! very overdue in my mind!!!

Also, i feel that the procurement system needs a serious look at. Example.....

Typhoon Landing light bulb....£509.62


Top that off with the latest rumour of issueing Stable belts (normally worn by Shineys and knobheads alike) to all serving personnel.

ROLL ON THE SDSR I SAY!!!!

[Pontius Navigator]

GW, at least someone's job is now secure.

[Vertico]

From the Armed Forces Benefits Calculator it says that a Sqn Ldr's pension is an investment of about £20k per year, which actually makes our wages quite reasonable (certainly on a par with civvy street).



I suspect that you have misquoted the Calculator. What it really means is that to achieve a Sqn Ldr's pension would require an investment of about £20k per year if a fund was being built up to buy a pension annuity at retirement. Sadly, there ain't no such fund!

The Armed Forces pensions (like almost every other public sector pension) have always been paid out of current taxation. At present there are about 4 "workers" (ie you, all the other Service mates and all non-Service workers) whose taxes support each pensioner (like me!). By 2050, it is projected that there will be just 2 workers supporting each pensioner (like you - I'll be long gone unless I make it to 110+!). It doesn't take a maths genius to work out what rates of income tax would then have to be paid by those relatively few workers to support the relatively large number of pensioners.

That rate would, of course, be socially unacceptable. Therefore, there is only one possibility: the "gold-plated" pensions which so many serving members of the Forces believe are their inalienable right ain't going to happen. Sure as God made little apples, those pensions are going to be sharply reduced.

Do I hear someone say they can't do that? Oh yes they can! Government is the only body which can change the rules of the game while play is actually in progress. They have done it many times in the past and will do it again in the future. So, all you happy dreamers, start working out now how you can build up assets outside the clutches of HMG so that you will be able to keep your grey heads above water when the time comes.:sad:

[whowhenwhy]

28 year old Sqn Ldr? I'm guessing your talking about Blunties, because I don't think you'll get a 28 year old Sqn Ldr in many other branches.