25%+ cut in allowances!

[Twon]

Not much detail on exactly what the cuts will involve but you can bet they're not morale positive!

Allowances for armed forces to be slashed - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/8181259/Allowances-for-armed-forces-to-be-slashed.html)

It is hard to argue about the specialist pay still being issued 3 or more years after leaving the qualifying post with possibly no chance (due to circumstances or intention) to ever perform those duties again. Just playing devil's advocate...

[Al R]

It is understood that the Chancellor, George Osborne was said to be "staggered" to learn that extra pay annually worth millions of pounds was paid to pilots who do not fly and submariners who no longer serve at sea.

I'm not surprised the public schoolboy is staggered.

"It is understood that the Shadow Chancellor, George Osborne was said to be "staggered" to learn that he had been caught, claiming £1,400 to cover the mortgage interest on his second home for October, when the limit had been cut to £1250 five months earlier."

There are tough, big decisions to be made at all levels right now - but on a personal level, he makes my skin crawl.

[MechGov]

A story from a Government friendly paper, spun to make our allowances look overly generous and us to appear dishonest. And so it begins.....

[Twon]

MechGov, you could be right. It mentions in there that we don't need receipts; I thought that only applied to IE at £5 or under. I've certainly had to provide receipts for all my audited claims and we do seem to get audited regularly. If only the politicians had our system then they might have only 100 serious cases a year (bearing in mind this is across 180,000 military vs. 600+ politicians); people in glass houses etc?!

I think there probably is some fat to cut in the system but I find it hard to believe that there is that much "waste". It also talks about making us spend the money first then claim it back. That might be ok if you're on £60K plus but for some of us lesser mortals, a 3 week course or duty away from home can soon mount up. Could this result in refusals to undertake duties away due to financial hardship? Besides, even our advances system is still capped at what you can potentially claim and is then followed up or taken from pay if the duty is not completed.

Where do we think the cuts will be apart from spec pay and CEA?

[Arty Fufkin]

Sounds like branch pay should be looked at as an alternative to the "basic plus flying pay" system we have now. Flying pay is not there to make up for the hazards of the job. Its there because without it, staying past your 6 year return of service would be financialy irresponsible. You expect to pay someone with 15 years flying experience the same as an adminer just because you put them in a ground job against their will? You won't be paying them it for long I assure you.
Post SDSR the RAF does appear to have more aircrew than it knows what to do with at the moment, but the markets are picking up and 50% of pilots on my Sqn have ATPLs burning holes in their back pockets. The cost of flying pay will seem pretty insignificant when you start loosing airframes because no-one in the military has more than 1500hrs in their logbook.

[Aeronut]

It's not flying pay that I object to aircrew recieving, its the officer pay! :E

[VinRouge]

Arty, the other 50%, including myself, will be doing their ATPLs pretty fast if they cut our specialist pay, especially in flying related ground jobs. The bucket of sh*t has just become heavier than the bucket of gold as far as I am reading in the telegraph.

Interested to read on the recruiting section that lots of RYR guys are p*ssing off to the middle east at the moment. I wouldnt be surprised if a large number of service pilots werent joining them in the near future.

[muttywhitedog]

I have heard that the personal contribution on HDT (Public) will be 9 miles to bring it into line with HDT (Private).

Cue many personnel demanding on-base SFA instead of one 15 miles away!

[VinRouge]

Going to get interesting at Brize then when we all move across :ugh::ugh::ugh:

Interesting to see whe have been round this sticky wicket before:

Forces face pay cut but senior officers refuse to surrender rail perk - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1460227/Forces-face-pay-cut-but-senior-officers-refuse-to-surrender-rail-perk.html)

I agree with comments on a thread; if they are going to review expenses, they might as well review the whole pay structure and do away with specialist allowances. I would prefer a marginal cut in pay scale, say 5% than see the lot go just because my speciality is in demand in a flying related ground job.

Maybe that way we will get a pension on an expense we currently get taxed on. :mad:

[Could be the last?]

"Local Overseas Allowance, which is paid to troops serving abroad where the cost of living is more expensive than the UK, will also be reduced. In 2009/10 LOA cost the MoD £224m."

My understanding is that LOA is also paid to offset the fact that spouses are restricted or unable to obtain work.........:confused:

[Blighter Pilot]

The Government and the MOD must be very, very careful.

In the wake of upcoming redundancies, the civil airline market picking up and on-going operations in Afghanistan and other areas, Armed Forces morale is close to breaking point.

Slashing allowances may seem like a logical cost-saving measure but if you have to offset that with training 500 specialist officers and other ranks in each service (Aircrew, EOD Specialists, Submariners and Divers) that have left the service it looks like false economy.

I agree that specialist pay shouldn't be paid if you are in a job that doesn't require your specialisation - but that is why there is a graduated reduction. Aircrew don't choose not to fly! - Manning post them for Service needs or career progression.

If we lose HDT, CEA, Daily Subsistence etc then I fear that the Military Covenant will be well and truly broken.

How can we expect our personnel to pay out of their own pocket for the priveledge of serving overseas, attending training courses or carrying out additional duties?

Out of interest - what was the total amount of MPs allowances claimed in the first 3 months of this parliment? Perhaps the expenditure review should take in all public sector workers?

I often work PH, 18hr + days but don't get overtime! And my 'specialist' pay is taxable but non-pensionable:mad:

If you look at an SACs/Privates wages and divide their daily rate by 24 hrs does it actually reflect minimum wage?

:mad:

[formertonkaplum]

We already do have to pay for the privellage of going on a course.


If your lucky enough to get a hotel on a course, you get daily subsistance but should you be in the block or a mess then you have to pay for our food.

Why ?

Wrong !!!!

Dump CEA, reduce flying pay, end FRI (its only the ones staying taking it anyway) and overhaul the entire Bollo*ks 'Specialist' pay awards and we will probably save enough to not have to impact LOA, HDT etc.

[Pontius Navigator]

For those with less than 20 years, there was swinging cut in allowances then and it was handled particularly badly. Of course as soon as the dust started to settle so people took protective action - PVR was one, moving in or out of messes as appropriate was another.

PDQ there was a new package, the Get Well Package to heal the harm done.

[drugsdontwork]

Excuse my ignorance but do civvies get an allowance for getting from home to work? If not then I'm sure that's on it's way. After all the mil (unlike civvies) do generally provide a place to live very near to the place of work.

Cut flying pay to those in flying posts and watch people walk. Okay, maybe not immediately, but many experienced people will have a change in mindset from "stay" to "what's out there". Then again that may be good to get the numbers down!

[tucumseh]

Excuse my ignorance but do civvies get an allowance for getting from home to work?No. But under certain terms of duty one can get "travelling time" but it is rare. Typically, you don't get an overnight stay unless you miss the last train or bus because you have worked late - and even then it is not unknown for beancounters to say you could have hitched (seriously!).

Civilians above a certain grade are termed "mobile" and can be posted at 3 months notice anywhere in the UK. The only real difference to the Services is if they don't turn up they are deemed to have resigned instead of being declared AWOL. This is essentially what happened when, for example, AbbeyWood opened. Most lost a fortune, not least from spouses having to give up jobs and Bristol house prices rocketing as soon as MoD announced the move.

Also, one can reasonably be expected to travel up to 3 hours each way, each day, from a permanent duty station to a detached duty station, for up to 3 years, without being entitled to overnighters. At a permanent duty station, this reduces to, I think, 1.5 hours. That is, if you choose to live further away than a 1.5 hours each way commute, say from London to Bristol, you forfeit allowances. It is why so many civvies with very responsible jobs are on significant benefits. Not unlike many Servicemen I imagine.

[day1-week1]

If FP goes from all but flying posts there it will literary will become 'danger money' as all the experience heads for the door leaving the young and the ex staff job lifers

[Shackman]

For 40 odd years I have had to pay for the 'privilege' of spending nights/weeks away from my home base and family. On the odd occasion I spent a longer time away in some far flung foreign clime (Falklands etc) then I was lucky enough to receive some additional allowances etc. Vary rarely, if ever, was I in pocket except when single and on detachment with an imprest to cover all expenses.

I am now a civilian contractor doing exactly the same job (and at the same desk) as my last tour. Yes, I get paid less - no x factor - and there is no such thing as home to duty, but the company at least recognises that when I go away overnight (or longer) on landaways etc then some recompense is due to cover additional expenses, such as eating!

[Daf Hucker]

Drugsdontwork,

You are quite right, civvies don't get "home-to-duty", however, if a company moved you from one location to another for the benefit of said company, they would recompense associated costs and they certainly wouldn't expect you to take a pay cut (unless they are trying to get you to resign:\, now there's a thought!). If you are posted to a non-flying post, in the interest of the service, the MOD cannot reasonably expect you to be financially worse off for doing so.

I am too old to provide the return of service for another OCU and am about to be posted to a non-flying, but "flying associated" post 200 miles away, for my last tour. Does the MOD/RAF expect me bare all the additional travel costs myself? I could move my family 200 miles with me, but is that really cost effective as they would have to provide me with the associated allowances (housing / disturbance / relocation etc).

It is easy to compare us with civvies and feel that we may be better off, but you need compare us with civvies who are being asked to move etc, due to the requirements of the company they work for.

For me personally, screwing around with the allowances that are paid in recompense for the costs incurred due to the requirements of the service, will be the final nail in the coffin. Sad really, it is not how I imagined I would be feeling in the last few years of service, having joined in 1977.

[charliegolf]

For 40 odd years I have had to pay for the 'privilege' of spending nights/weeks away from my home base and family.

Shack,

Whilst I only did 8 years, I never ever paid for subsistence or accomodation when away from base (Odi, Gut and Finn). I accept that I went to the bar more often than i would at home, so more on booze than when at home. Why were you stung?

CG

[glad rag]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^this^^^^^^^^^^

A colleague and myself once spent 3 days getting to Suda Bay via RAF AT, all we had to eat were some croissants and blagged mini mars/marathon bars from a fuel stop.
No card/money from home base.
The AT crew eventually felt sorry for us and quite literally gave us their burnt/wasted rations from their own galley.

And I'm not making this up.

[Pontius Navigator]

Also, one can reasonably be expected to travel up to 3 hours each way, each day, from a permanent duty station to a detached duty station, for up to 3 years, without being entitled to overnighters.

And probably get tax relief on additional costs whereas a Service drawing HtD (RAS) is not. However if based at, say, Coningsby and living in Lincoln, and one was detached to Cranwell then you should be eligible for PCR and tax relief on the difference from 40p/mile.

If the beanies decided you should live in during the week and paid only the one return journey per week you could claim tax relief at 40p/ for the other 4 return journeys.

[tucumseh]

should be eligible

PN, I believe you are correct but I gave up long ago trying to persuade HM Inland Revenue.

In the example I quoted (3 hours each way, each day) the regs say (or can be interpreted as saying) the travelling time can be deemed working hours. I recall one guy pitching up, working 1.5 hours, then going home, saying he'd done his 37 hours at the end of the week. This went down like a lead balloon and he was told to start doing 14 hour days like the rest of us. After a year he submitted an application for about 9 months time off in lieu! He got what he (and his family) wanted - a transfer back to permanent duty station; but no more promotion. I guess in the Services he'd have been locked up.

[round&round]

Sorry guys, but reading the posts of some of the serving personnel you come across as extremely naive and totally out of touch with commercial realities. The airline market will pick up but the majority of airlines will employ the cheapest people they can get - probably some kid willing to work for peanuts to build hours. For all those who are thinking of throwing their toys out the pram, be very, very careful. You may find you are unemployed for some considerable period and/or working for an awful lot less. Sure, one or two leavers will get great, well paid jobs and shout it from the rooftops, but a lot of posters on here have such bad attitudes and massive chips no one will touch you. The jobs market is currently saturated and it's going to get worse before it gets better, so maybe you should try to look for the positives rather than the negatives. Even if your allowances are cut you will still have a pay, pension and reimbursement package better than 99.9% of people.

[Pontius Navigator]

Tuc, no, he would have been offered a quarter, mess, or SSSA.

Usual rules, you play ball with me, I'll stuff the bat right up . . .

[glad rag]

Even if your allowances are cut you will still have a pay, pension and reimbursement package better than 99.9% of people.

Well said.

[Mahogany_Bomber]

Round&Round, Glad Rag,

what "the other 99.9% of people" get is in my opinion irrelevant. We in HM Forces have voluntarily signed away some of our fundamental rights and as a quid pro quo HMG has agreed to look after us and our families. We have an unlimited liability to the government up to and including killing and being killed, unlike any other workers, and as such our circumstances are unique. Having fulfilled my side of the bargain for almost 20 years with the accompanying physical, mental and social penalties it is only right that HMG fulfill their obligations in return. I cannot step away from my obligations without leaving the service, what the government appears to want to do is to reduce its obligations to me whilst still retaining my unlimited liability. The psychological covenant between me and the service has just about been broken and it won't take much more in the way of further reducing my allowances/quality of life/etc to destroy it irrevocably.

I don't expect a gravy train or to make a profit out of my allowances but I certainly don't expect to be out of pocket for serving my country. I've already sacrificed any number of things over the years, can the powers that be can let me have back all of the times I've let people down as well as the cancelled holidays, missed birthdays, Christmases, sons first steps/words/day at school or umpteen changes of school? Can they give me back all of my mates who are no longer with us? If they can then I might be prepared to accept these chages but of course thay can't, so why should I maintain my side of the bargain when they can't maintain theirs?

MB

[Compressorstall]

Before I joined up, I had a pretty crap job, but actually took a pay cut to join the RAF, even though the responsibility in the RAF was far more than the post I had outside. We are now much better paid and it grates when people see such complaining about pay and allowances on here. I have worked with some who know more about the allowances package than Accounts ever seem to, but they also spend their time claiming the very last penny like an absolute pedant. I didn't join the RAF because of the allowances package, I joined because it was the job I wanted to do, and still enjoy it. The pain isn't nice, but you can either complain about it and leave, or stay and make the best of it.
Incidentally, we all seem to know someone who left and is making a packet, but all of the civvy jobs I have looked at have never promised that much, unless there is loads of extra pain involved - why aren't some of the shop stewards on here not on some 6 figure salary? Why don't people stop complaining or using this as yet another route to highlight their embittered attitude towards flying pay? How about a little less doom and a bit more wondering what the future might look like - cup half-full anyone?

[Blighter Pilot]

MB

Well said - the other 99.9% haven't been putting their lives on the line.

For those of us who have been on continuous operations since GRANBY and have buried several friends through to the 18 year old squaddies currently engaging the TB on a daily basis, none of us joined for the allowance package.

To strip what is left away and compare us to our civilian counterparts is not acceptable.

[Twon]

MB - Well said; I agree completely that we shouldn't be trying to make money from allowances but they should at least cover the expenditure we have when performing duties for HMG.

Some on here forget that we do not choose where we live (I agree that I gave up this right on joining) and that HDT is to compensate you for actual expenditure incurred because you are being forced to live where you might not necessarily would chose to do so. At least in civvy street you can chose to live 1 mile or 100 miles from work.

CS - I think you have missed MB's points and the fact that most of us still want to serve and meet our obligations to the Country. However, I do not expect to have to pay for the privilege of being ordered to attend courses or to move from one location to the other, or to have my family suffer emotionally or financially due to this increased nibbling to death by ducks. I accept your point that if we don't like it we should leave; I am weighing up that very option over the next 12 months. However, and it may sound trite (or a similar rhyming word) to you, but I still want to serve my Country and am proud of my Service despite all that has recently happened. I do hope that this does not push out the good (or average in my case) leaving only the bad to fill the gaps.

Rant off

Twon

[day1-week1]

From the 'pre-briefing' to the torygraph it seems that HDT may be up for slimng down, any thoughts on GYH(P/D)? DHE is a massive burden on the MOD so they are fairly keen for servicepersons to buy their own house, put down roots, etc. If career/service needs requires an individual to move away from a commutable distance, it is probably of benefit to all if they 'suck it up', the family stay put, and they move into the mess for the duration - no need for expensive move, no SFQ (which I sure the MOD would rather be shot of) and no CEA implications. If we lose GYH allowance then I imagine there will be both an increase in PVR rate and an immediate surge in applications for SFQ, something which there are hardly enough of now.

[Melchett01]

day1-week1, you're thinking again, stop it.

As much as we are broke, this is a political decision which is why I believe the final say is sitting with the PM. It wouldn't look particularly good for the PM to make a statement on the military covenant only for the MOD / Treasury to undercut him.

That said, I wait with interest to see the outcome - I'm already taking home less as level 1 SO2 than I did as an level 9 SO3 due to a combination of changes to allowances, not getting allowances paid, higher tax and having to move back in to the Mess to do a weekly commute. There's only so much people are willing to take.

Go on Dave, press to test, we dare you.

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Well said - the other 99.9% haven't been putting their lives on the line.

Absolutely wrong. There are many other occupations on this planet with a high risk of death. It's not only the military who put their lives on the line for the benefit of others and just because you're not getting shot at doesn't mean it isn't dangerous.

Before you jump down my throat and say I don't know what I'm talking about members of my family, including me, have served in the military since the beginning of the last century.

You place yourself in the top 0.1% of the world population just because you serve in the military? You should take your blinkers off old son.

[PFMG]

Re HDT. I suggest if everyone applied for a married quarter (or whatever the PC term is now used for a house that you live in with your family) in a coordinated strike on DHE the combined effect might just make the decision makers sit up and listen.

[Mahogany_Bomber]

Lord Spandex Masher,

the 99.9% stat was as utilised by another poster, I merely recycled it in rebuttal. The actual stat/percentage is irrelevant and I certainly don't consider myself anything special because of my job choice (we're all volunteers after all) but equally I don't expect the unique element (kill/be killed) of it to be ignored by my employers when it comes to the measures/incentives used to recruit and retain me. They've been happy to have 20 years of unlimited commitment from me and now they expect to retain that commitment whilst degrading and in some areas eradicating their commitment to me. Yes there are other jobs in the world with an inherent risk of death and they no doubt by and large attract the appropriate level of pay, but (and it's a big but) other than other niche occupations (i.e police firearms officer) we are the only people for whom giving up your life and taking somebody else's is for some of us explicit in our job and for everyone else contained in the "and any other duties as detailed" part of the job description.

So no, I don't consider myself special as an individual but I do believe that the unique nature of the ultimate consequence of my lawful actions (death) requires special consideration by HMG when addressing how I and my family are treated.

MB

[Pontius Navigator]

PFMG, I doubt it.

There is an historical lack of SFA at High Wycombe so they stick people all over the place and into hirings. Hirings aren't what they used to be but they are used extensively.

Applying for quarters would be barely perceptible to those that matter.

The real crunch would be if people did opt for the messes. Until recently they expected visitors to double up, could that become a norm again?

[Lord Spandex Masher]

MB, my response was aimed at Blighter Pilot.

I certainly agree with you that retention incentives are a must in these high risk jobs. There is no doubt about it in my mind and I certainly do not condone a reduction in incentives - or indeed any other part of your life - for the same level of commitment from you.

I was just making a point.

[Canadian Break]

Here's another one that has slipped in beneath the radar. If one arranged the trip to one's overseas posting, one received an allowance that was the equivalent of the airfare - for however many were travelling. Now it appears that the airfare to be used is Sleazy Jet -(there are other cheap airlines available). The upshot is that whilst I only lost about £100 on my trip to my current location, on my return I will be given approx 75 of Her Majesty's pounds to cover a bill that will be in the region of £600, just for ferry fares. Check out the change from Privately Arranged Passage to Privately Assisted Passage for more details. :mad:

[Mahogany_Bomber]

Lord Spandex Masher,

I do however place myself in the top 0.1% of the world's population by dint of being a Yorkshireman!

MB

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Yorkshire? Didn't that used to be part of Northumbria?;)

[dropintheoggin]

How much flying will one have to do for their job to be a "flying post" I wonder?

[Charlie Time]

And flying related posts?

[BEagle]

As mere civilian filth, I was at a NATO conference last year at Eindhoven - this included most major European air forces plus QinetiQ and others.

The only major air force not to turn up was the RAF - because no-one would pay the travel costs.

This did not go unnoticed. "Has the RAF given everything up?" was the exasperated comment from a colleague.

Some of the RAF's allowances certainly were ridiculous - remember 'porterage'? Nor can I really understand in-floight rationing, such as why a flight taking off at 1400 and landing at 1730 earns the crew a hot meal, FFS. Sadly though, where there are allowances there will always be people who try to rape the system.

For incidental expenses, individual company Visa cards and receipts for anything which cannot be paid by Visa. How hard is that?

However, touch flying pay (and equivalent specialist pay) at your peril, Georgie Porgie, puddin' and pie.... Your hooray-Henry 'Buller' ignorance of life's realities is becoming plain for all to see.

[BEagle]

dropintheoggin, about 40 years ago, pilots in staff appointments used to have to fly a minimum number of hours per month in order to retain entitlement to flying pay. The chief CoE god-botherer at Cranwell when I was a Flt Cdt had his wings and regularly used to pop up to see his boss...

But in general, the whole thing was a flight safety and supervisory nightmare - and it was then realised that it was safer and cheaper to pay pilots on ground tours than it was to replace aircraft and bury the casualties.

Although if a pilot chooses to reject a flying tour, entitlement to flying pay should certainly be queried....

[Pontius Navigator]

If one arranged the trip to one's overseas posting, one received an allowance that was the equivalent of the airfare

Humbug. I made my own way home from my overseas posting and got not a penny. My ex-plotter did the same and ditto.

He drove from Singapore whereas I only drove from Cyprus. Even had we been given the cost of an indulgence passage it would have been something.

[Pontius Navigator]

BEagle, I think it stopped around1960. The RCAF still had it in the mid-60s.

As you say, it was a flight safety issue but also the cost of providing aircraft like the Anson or Chippy just for stick time.

Jets were also made available for w/e landaways - same deal :)

[dropintheoggin]

lunchboxlegend - Loss of FP is a 25% paycut for some!

[Pontius Navigator]

When flying pay was cut before it was not retrospective. Initially, IIRC, Flying Instructional Pay was reduced and eventually stopped but those already in receipt retained their entitlement to it.

What could possibly happen is a slow reduction in flying pay for those not yet in receipt and a possible freeze or slow down for those in receipt. I think a similar thing was done with the last non-flying tour flying pay; those more than 3 years from flying retained their flying pay for that tour, ie up to 6 years, then had to return to flying.

AFAIK sudden cessation has never happened.

And HtoD is actually a fairly recent allowance too IIRC. I think it was introduced around 1974 at 1.6p/mile. At an average earning growth HtD should now be 19.9p/mile. Using per capita GDP it would be 24.1p/mile.

[JTIDS]

For incidental expenses, individual company Visa cards and receipts for anything which cannot be paid by Visa. How hard is that?

It is according to a certain air base in Oxfordshire impossible. If you go away on a trip and haven't got an FSI (say a course or sim training somewhere else) and try and use your company credit card to pay for it you now get billed the amount you spend plus 30% even though your fully enititled to have the amount refunded if you pay it out of your own pocket :ugh::ugh::ugh:

[Siggie]

MB,

You are certainly in the top 0.1% of the Yorkshire population - you can read and write.

[Mr C Hinecap]

having to move back in to the Mess to do a weekly commute

Woah there fella. Personal choice - nothing to do with anything else, so don't expect a subsidy. Move family, or be a weekend commuter.

[Whenurhappy]

With the recent and well reported reduction of LOA I now find myself in the situation of being paid considerably less than I received in Whitehall (INVOLSEP) - and I am supporting a family in what appears to be an exotic - yet chuffingly expensive - overseas location. I have a number of friends and former colleagues working abroad, say, for the Big 4 who are astounded that we are even paying for our accommodation and are so limited in many of our business travel expenses. I would not have taken up this current 'assignment' if I had known how expensive it would be and how our allowances were being savaged. I do not believe that the Authority (MOD) exercised due diligence.

I have had to return to UK for a hospital appointment and was authorised arbitrarily by my 'budget manager' (located some 5 hours away and who has no FSA qualifications, btw) to spend no more that £85 per night for accommodation in Central London. The RAF CLub was booked out, as was Union Jack and Victory Services CLub. I ended up staying at an IBIS hotel in the 'East End' and paying the £20 difference myself. Only other accommodation was a Youth Hostel! Same budget manager authorised a rental car, to include overnight parking (£30) and congestion charges (£8 pd). I declined it on grounds of practicality.

I could go on, however one avenue is to claim work related expenses against ones PAYE tax at the end of the FY.

[Pontius Navigator]

The argument seems to be divided along the lines of those out who say they don't get the allowances and those in that say they deserve them.

Let us look at it a different way.

Those outside are probably in jobs where travel and consequent subsistence are part and parcel of the job. Those in are employed to work at one location during one tour.

If allowances were slashed, as indeed they were for courses, then those that are pinged, or volunteer, are disadvantaged compared to those that simply kept their heads down.

[glad rag]

MB - Well said; I agree completely that we shouldn't be trying to make money from allowances

I quite agree about the blatant making money bit, but then (at the time) if you were to self fund (in the example I gave earlier our "jaunt" across Europe) we WOULD NOT HAVE RECIEVED 100% of the outlay.

It's been some years now but I think the figure was around 82% reimbursement.

[Melchett01]

Mr C Hinecap,

having to move back in to the Mess to do a weekly commute

Woah there fella. Personal choice - nothing to do with anything else, so don't expect a subsidy. Move family, or be a weekend commuter.

I think you will find that the commute / Mess decision is not quite as cut and dry as you make out. I don't know of any Service member and home owner that would choose to do a weekly commute, it is probably the worst of all options in terms of disruption. However in many cases - mine included - people have no choice; they are told by Manning to go to a posting on the other side of the country.

And to quote the JSP 752, HTD is paid to compensate Service personnel because of the requirement to be mobile and have limited choice. So, for many, it has absolutely nothing to do with personal choice and a weekly commute is required to maintain some slim vestige of a family life and stability.

However, having spent many years encouraging people to buy their own properties to ease the burden on the MOD to provide all the facilities associated with living on base, they now want to pull the rug from under people who have done just that. And to those who think of allowances as freebies, perks of the job etc, the MOD Benefits Calculator is very keen to include allowances in the overall renumeration package; if they want to do that, then they must be prepared for the media / political fall out when people complain that their overall renumeration has been reduced on top of the pay freeze, pensions review etc.

Seems to me that the MOD and those keen to bash service personnel want to have their cake and eat it.

[Canadian Break]

Pontius old chap, ref Post 46; I too drove home from Cyprus, but that rather misses the point. They pay for me to get out here, but don't pay for me to get home. How does that work?

[Joe Black]

I can't believe HTD is up for debate here - this is an essential allowance for some families and NO it is not just a simple case of "move your family to where you are posted"; what about families where both are serving at bases at different ends of the country. I'm approaching a point where I'm ashamed to serve.

[Willard Whyte]

Perhaps one of those serving at a different end of the country to the other should jack it in and look after the family?

[The Nip]

JB, While I fully understand your stance, the one thing we all have in common is a CHOICE. Whether you both serve or just one of you it matters not. No one couple is anymore important than anyone else. I am not suggesting you meant that, but it has become a theme throughout the military today.

[Redcarpet]

Willard, seriously?? :mad:

[Melchett01]

lunchboxlegend - Not sure which scheme you are talking about there. Rather than any specific scheme, I was thinking more in the round of the MOD wanting to get as many people off base and into their own homes to reduce the costs of having to provide facilities to house them etc. They can't have it both ways. From a personal perspective, the family factor isn't an issue, but I'm damned if I am going to spend the best part of my life living in largely sub-standard accommodation on a remote base, that I would frankly be embarrassed to invite friends to stay at. In the interests of a balanced life, I chose to buy a house in a location that was close to the majority of likely postings; this was done having discussed career and personal aspirations with the Desk so they were well aware of my thoughts and intentions. But I refuse to subsidise the MOD because of where it chose to post me in relation to my permanent home address.

However, if as it seems, the concept of individual choice is the key factor, on that basis, you have just consigned almost all allowances and arguably even specialist pay to a stroke from the accountant's pen. At the very least, if that is your rationale for getting rid of HTD, then the same applies to CEA; people have a choice as to whether they put their children in boarding schools or use schools local to their base. Therefore lets get rid of CEA. And before you argue about damaging children's educational prospects, that argument also goes for HTD and spouses' career prospects if you force them to move. People also have a choice as to whether they apply for overseas sunshine tours; they go into it with their eyes open, why pay them LOA as well? People have a choice as to whether they join up to be aircrew, EOD, diver, submariner or any one of the numerous trades attracting specialist pay; they join to do the job not for the allowance; if specialist pay is a recruitment and retention allowance, then only those who really want to do the job for what it is will choose to join if you get rid of it.

And yes, I am playing Devil's advocate slightly with that last example. However, you get my drift. The concept of personal choice can quite easily be argued to extend right the way across the military, its allowances and possibly even its pay structures. Get rid of HTD on the basis of personal choice, and CEA starts to look very shaky. Get rid of that and watch the PVRs go through the roof. And whilst I'm not a lawyer, I would put good money on spouses with careers of their own taking a very dim view that their lives are being trashed by proxy thanks to MOD policy; in this litigious day and age, I'm surprised we haven't already seen claims under Human Rights legislation about MOD posting policies damaging spouses' rights to a life, career, family etc.

In short, be very careful what you wish for, because the law of unintended consequences has a nasty habit of biting you hard.

[Joe Black]

The Nip,

You are correct, undoubtedly we do all have a choice and it's certainly something that we will all have to make, no matter how difficult it may be. In the example I mentioned, I just feel that it is pretty harsh to say to a couple(both wholly committed and wishing to remain in the service) that one of them should leave in order to live together, otherwise commute for SERVICE NEEDS and receive bugger all in HTD. It's a difficult one.

I'm at ISK right now and if what I think comes out with regard to allowances in the next few months, I believe morale will reach a dangerous point.

Joe

[RumPunch]

Well if you ask me there is no morale left anymore in the RAF. I knew things would be bad but I did not expect us to get hit as bad as this yet again :(

I just cant be bothered to argue anymore, my decision to pull the black and yellow is already made.

[Quazzi]

MB / Melchett,

I agree entirely with both your viewpoints.

Just for my benefit could someone explain the meaning of 'recruitment and retention incentives'?

In fact I think I understand the retention part, if you don't want to / need to retain people, stop paying the incentive. But if that person has been recruited under the premise of receiving a specialist pay incentive monthly / annually for filling a specific position, isn't it slightly offside to renege on the deal?

If you dangle a carrot you have to let the mule eat it eventually. Pull it away and the mule will stop trusting you and probably bite you instead!

Another whiskey methinks.

[Grabbers]

Now THAT is funny!:D:D:D

[Mr C Hinecap]

Melchett - just to continue with the advocate work...

Rather than any specific scheme, I was thinking more in the round of the MOD wanting to get as many people off base and into their own homes to reduce the costs of having to provide facilities to house them etc.

So an implicit rather than explicit directive you 'followed' to buy a house, then live in it. You can be in the housing ladder and not live in the house, as many military people do. You made a choice.

They can't have it both ways. From a personal perspective, the family factor isn't an issue, but I'm damned if I am going to spend the best part of my life living in largely sub-standard accommodation on a remote base, that I would frankly be embarrassed to invite friends to stay at.

The family factor is an issue - don't say it isn't. I don't know of that many sub-standard quarters as you put it - sub to what standard? Remote? We put airfields there - not much choice there.

In the interests of a balanced life, I chose to buy a house in a location that was close to the majority of likely postings;

Balanced life? That'll be family then?


this was done having discussed career and personal aspirations with the Desk so they were well aware of my thoughts and intentions.

'with the Desk'? Don't tell me you believed for a minute that view might extend beyond the tenure of the incumbent? Makes no difference to the Desk anyway, you go where they need a bum on a seat - as you've found out.

But I refuse to subsidise the MOD because of where it chose to post me in relation to my permanent home address.

You don't have to - but you chose to live outside a system that is provided for you so are accommodated where you work.

I happen to agree with 'what is best for the family' and, were my future different to the one planned, probably do exactly the same as you. I suppose you flew a certain type and were fortunate to be based somewhere for a good duration. Very lucky if you were. Most other Branches don't have that luxury so would never expect to have a house and live in it without travel, and know it was their choice to do so.

[Blighter Pilot]

In terms of cutting specialist pay - would that not be a change to terms of service?

If so - do we not have to agree to a change to our terms or can we take the MOD to court if it enforces the changes without giving us the option?

Just a thought.....:E

[Whenurhappy]

Melchett - do I detect a whiff of envy of those serving on 'sunshine' tours? Why should those serving abroad be financially disadvantaged by your suggestion of withdrawal of LOA (which has been slashed, btw)?
You have to accept that it does cost a hell of a lot more to live abroad, especially away from a PJOB/Garrison. For example, son is boarding in UK as there are no English-language schools within 100 miles.
This is my third overseas tour in 9 years because of my skill-set; other tours in between were INVOLSEP.


In sum, if you want people to fill overseas appointments, it is fair and reasonable to compensate them. And it is relevant, in my case, to compare my package w
ith those companies who send executives - and their families - abroad.

Oh, and for those criticising me being flown back to UK for a medical appointment - it is for specialist treatment not available in my HN.

[Winco]

Gentlemen,

Lets face it, whatever you/I/we think of it all, the government will do whatever they want to do and ignore the views of the rest of us. The cold fact is that without the backing of those at the top of the military trees, nothing will happen. And thereby lies the biggest fundamental problem facing all three services today, but especially the RAF.

I am often haranged on pprune for complaining about the quality of the airships we have and have had in recent times in the RAF, but the fact remains that none of them has been, or would be prepared to stand up publicly and say 'enough is enough' Without that type of support, all of your arguments are doomed to failure, simply because those at the top of government will never get to know the true amount of ill-feelng being generated here.

Most of the arguments on this forum are highly relevant and legitimate to those involved, and I have great sympathy for most of them. The fiasco of flying pay is one area however, where we have shot ourselves in the foot 'big time'

This utter nonesence about 'non aircrew' filling a 'flying related' post has done the flying community no favours at all. I know of FCs and even ATs who have kept their flying pay simply because someone has deemed that their 'new' posting is flying related. What a farce! I have heard and read the arguments that 'they may be required to rejoin the E-3 fleet therefore....' many times, and it is frankly a disgrace! There have been JO FCs (and a few senior ones also!) who are back in the ground environment, receiving more flying pay than front line aircrew on Op. The same goes for some ATs who have managed to cling onto their FP, and whatever your beliefs, that cannot be right. It is little wonder therefore that when the beancounters look at all of this, they rub their grubby little hands with glee at the prospect of making significant savings.

To those of you left in, my best wishes and I hope that you can salvage something from your already depleted allowances package. To those considering departing the datum, it really is NOT that bad outside, and the biggest and most refreshing thing you will find is that (providing you play fair) your new Boss will look out for you and stand up for you.........

unlike your current one!!

[Sideshow Bob]

dropintheoggin,

I'm glad that at 42 you can find it so amusing to make a mockery of so many people's careers. You must be an absolute legend.

If you are willing to make such a comment, could you please explain what/who you are?

Please refer to the Banter thread.

(p.s. get a life whilst you're at it)

[Wrathmonk]

your new Boss will look out for you and stand up for you

I'm sure there are lots of people in BA and Ryanair (to name but two) who don't share your confidence, otherwise why is membership of unions / pilot associations so popular? Perhaps its so they have someone to fight their battles when their Boss (who looks out for them and stands by them:}) screws them over with changes in working practices, allowance packages etc. Perhaps we need a military union .....:ok:

The harsh truth is the MOD has been broken by a decade or more of mismanagement and failure to see the inevitable train coming the other way down the tunnel - if a reduction in the allowances package is unacceptable it's not too many clicks on JPA to PVR. Not sure there will be many standing in the way to stop you go - after all a volunteer is worth dozens of pressed men (or women!). And if you choose not to use the facilities provided (i.e FQ) then that is your choice. The fact that they may be $hite makes no difference (sadly:bored:). Of course, this reduction in the 'fringe benefits' may all be a grand plan to encourage people to walk out of the door of their own accord.....

[Junglydaz]

dropintheoggin,


Quote:
I'm glad that at 42 you can find it so amusing to make a mockery of so many people's careers. You must be an absolute legend.

If you are willing to make such a comment, could you please explain what/who you are?
Please refer to the Banter thread.

(p.s. get a life whilst your at it)


Doing so well with the banter until the schoolboy spelling mistake!:ugh:

ps. I'll get a life too eh? :ok:

[Willard Whyte]

Yes, Redcarpet, seriously.

[Winco]

Wrathmonk

I can't speak for Ryan Air, but I can assure you that a great many pilots do share my view, and most join one of the pilot associations simply because we need to have a coherant voice speaking on behalf of us and we clearly can't do that as individuals, pretty much like every other organisation/union.

That is the problem you have in the military at the moment. None of the top men are prepared to go public with what the troops are saying. (they are of course more than willing to complain after they leave and have their pensions secured!)

I agree with your comments about MOD mismanagement, however your comment about FQ is completely wrong. It DOES matter. People have a right to expect reasonable accomodation and for you to suggest that they should accept sh1te is wrong IMO.

Ultimately you may well be correct of course about the 'grand plan' and I wouldn't be surprised if there were a big element of truth in that. Good luck to all of you that are left in. Things are going to get tough (er)

[heights good]

Just as a comparison

Expenses for which MPs may claim include:

Accommodation: Payable only to non-London area MPs to cover expenses incurred for overnight accommodation necessary for the performance of an MP's parliamentary duties. Claims may be made for rental payments and associated expenses such as utility bills, up to an annual limit of £19,900 of which a maximum of £17,400 may be claimed for rental payments. Alternatively MPs may claim for hotel accommodation up to a maximum of £130 per night in the London area and £105 elsewhere.

London Area Living Payment: This payment is limited to £3,760 per financial year payable monthly.

Travel and Subsistence: MPs may claim for certain travel and subsistence expenses, including food and non-alcoholic drinks, incurred in relation to their parliamentary duties. This includes journeys between the constituency and Westminster, travel within the constituency, extended UK travel and journeys to the EU. MPs may also claim for travel and subsistence expenses incurred for family members and members of their staff.

Winding Up Expenses: These expenses are designed to meet the cost of completing the outstanding parliamentary functions of a person who ceases to be a Member of Parliament and are limited to £40,609.

[heights good]

In addition MPs can claim the following. Ref: Green Book – MP expenses, Parliamentary Standards Website & BBC

http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-finance-office/greenbook0907.pdf

http://www.parliamentarystandards.org.uk/

Subsistence (p14)

A flat-rate sum of £25 may be claimed for any night
which a Member spends away from his or her main home
on parliamentary business. No other payment in respect of
subsistence may be claimed

Accommodation (p14)

Either
Rent of one additional home in either London or the
constituency (limited to £1250 per month for any new
rental agreement on a newly-rented property) (in addition
the cost of a deposit may be met, although this must
be repaid when the deposit, or a proportion thereof, is
returned)

Or

Mortgage interest in respect of one additional home in
either London or the constituency (limited to £1250 per
month)

Or

Hotel accommodation in either London or the
constituency (limited to £1250 per month)

Travel expenses (BBC NEWS | UK | UK Politics | What MPs can claim on expenses (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8039590.stm))

There is no limit on the amount of travel expenses MPs can claim - but it is subject to certain rules. They can claim business class air fares and first class rail travel for Parliamentary business within the UK and up to three visits a year to European institutions, as well as up to 30 single journeys a year for spouses or children. MPs can also claim for staff travel - up to 24 single journeys a year between Westminster and their constituency. Overall MPs claimed £4.5m in travel expenses in 2006/7.

Petty Cash (p24)

Members may be reimbursed for petty cash, the limit being £50
per month. Any claims for items costing £25 or more will need to
be accompanied by relevant receipts. You must keep a petty cash
book recording what items petty cash is spent on.

Travel expenditure (p35)

Members can claim for reasonable travel and associated costs
provided that journeys are undertaken for the purpose of
performing their parliamentary duties. For the purposes of this
allowance.

In addition, staff, spouses and civil partners, and children up to the
age of 18 are entitled to certain travel allowances.

Motor mileage rate

To cover business travel by private motor car 40p per mile for the first 10,000 miles
25 per per mile thereafter
Motor Cycle mileage To cover business travel by private motor cycle 24p per mile
Bicycle mileage To cover business travel by private cycle 20p per mile

House of Commons Travel Card (p36)

A Travel Card is available to all Members to pay for all allowable
train, air, coach, ferry and parking costs for yourself, your family
and your staff.

Family Travel (p37)

Spouses and civil partners are entitled to up to 30 single journeys
each year between London and the constituency or the Member’s
main home.
Dependent children (including stepchildren, foster children etc)
who are under 18 – or over 18 and still in full time secondary
education until the end of the academic year in which their 18th
birthday falls – are each entitled to up to 30 single journeys each year


Value for money (p40)

There is no restriction on the class of travel for Members.
However, you are encouraged to purchase tickets through the
Parliamentary Travel Office so that the House can benefit from
route deals. You are also encouraged to purchase the best value
tickets, for example by advance purchase. Members are able to
claim the cost of an advance purchase ticket which they buy but
cannot in the event use.

Security budget (p56)

Where the local police advise, the House will contribute to the
costs of security measures taken to safeguard Members, their staff
and their equipment at their constituency office or surgery. AOE
must be used for the first £1000 of expenditure. The House will
meet half of the rest of the cost up to a maximum contribution
of £2000.

Help for Members with disabilities (p56)

The Department provides assistance to Members with disabilities,
subject to a report from a consultant occupational health medical
practitioner retained by the House. Assistance can take the
form of additional staff, necessary equipment or help with travel
for example.

By allowance year (p59)

Members may also apply to transfer funds between allowance
years. Subject to there being sufficient funds available, up to
10 per cent of each of the following allowances can be carried
forward into the following allowance year: AOE; Staffing
Expenditure; and Communications Expenditure. In certain cases,
an advance can be made into the existing year from the following
year’s budget.

Administrative and Office Expenditure (AOE) (p19)

The AOE is an allowance designed to provide for facilities,
equipment, supplies and services for Members and their staff.
It may only be used to meet the following costs:
Accommodation for office or surgery use or for occasional
meetings
Equipment and supplies for the office or surgery
Work commissioned and other services
Certain travel costs not met out of travel expenditure

Loans for deposits on rental properties (IPSA)

5.19 A Member who is eligible to claim for rental costs may apply to IPSA for a loan to cover any deposit payable at the commencement of a tenancy.

Additional budgets for MPs with responsibility for caring for others (IPSA)

5.17 A Member who is eligible to claim Accommodation Expenses for rental costs may claim an additional amount of up to £2,425 in any financial year for any additional expenditure that may be required, for each person for whom that Member has caring responsibilities.

5.18 For this purpose an MP will be deemed to have caring responsibilities in the circumstances set out below:

A dependent child of up to the age of five years
A dependent child in full-time education, of up to the age of 21 years

Members who are the sole carer only

Any family member for whom the MP is the primary carer, who is in receipt of one of the following benefits:
• Attendance Allowance
• Disability Living Allowance at the middle or highest rate for personal care
• Constant Attendance Allowance at or above the normal maximum rate with an Industrial Injuries Disablement Benefit, or basic (full day) rate with a War Disablement Pension All Members

Incidental Expenses Allowance

Worth up to £22,193, this allowance is aimed at costs incurred in the course of an MP's duty - such as accommodation costs, office equipment and supplies.

Resettlement Allowance

Paid to MPs who lose their seat or stand down at a general election - it is based on their age and length of service and amounts to between 50% and 100% of their annual salary.

Insurance

12.11 In addition to any insurance which is payable under Parts 5 and 9 of this Scheme, MPs may claim in respect of premium payments for the following types of insurance:

(a) Employer’s Liability Insurance, up to a limit of £10,000,000;
(b) Public Liability Insurance, up to a limit of £5,000,000;
(c) Travel Insurance, to cover travel under paragraph 7.2.

Contingency payments

12.13 Where a MP necessarily incurs expenditure or liability for expenditure related to the performance of the MP's parliamentary functions which is not covered by any of the allowances set out in this Scheme or, if it is covered by one or more of those allowances, it exceeds any financial limit that may apply, the MP may apply to IPSA to be reimbursed on an exceptional basis in respect of that expenditure.

MPs claiming for mortgage interest

5.12 For MPs claiming for mortgage interest, the annual Accommodation Expenses budget (including all associated expenditure as set out at paragraph 5.3) is £17,500.

It seems that the military do NOT have it that great after all! :mad:

[Whenurhappy]

Yeo, I agreee pretty generous allowances for MPs...but so what? We are not MPs and I suspect that few of us want to be. If we are to make comparisons it should be, where possible, be
like for like. In an earlier posting I compared my package with a senior consultant with the Big Four (where I fully experct to be employed) and not with an astronaut, let's say, or a dustman!

[The Nip]

Winco, You stated

-
I am often haranged on PPRuNe for complaining about the quality of the airships we have and have had in recent times in the RAF, but the fact remains that none of them has been, or would be prepared to stand up publicly and say 'enough is enough' Without that type of support, all of your arguments are doomed to failure, simply because those at the top of government will never get to know the true amount of ill-feelng being generated here.

The present crop were once, your Flt/Sqn/Wing Cdrs etc and there are many on here who know them personally. They will argue that they are great guys and the right type to be promoted. And probably in the past the same has been said about previous leaders. There has been many an arguement on here about, whether in that case, it is right for the winged race to run the RAF. With hindsight does this arguement still stand?

[Wrathmonk]

Winco

Have you been a bit sneaky and gone back to edit your original post by adding the caveat

(providing you play fair)

Or do I need to go to SpecSavers....:8

Edited to add - The Nip : Not sure exactly but I'm sure Winco has previously spoken of being on the front line in the 70's and, now being a 747 Capt, must have left by his 38 point - I suspect many of the current Airships hadn't even joined up (or were still at BFTS etc) when he left. Apologies Winco if I am incorrect and being agesist!!!

[baby-spice]

As you can see I'm more of a 'dogger' than active participant but the in-fighting on this thread is a real shame.

As a military team I think we all agree that whilst the allowance package should not provide anybody with profit, no serviceman should be financially penalised for carrying out a duty.

I give you my recent expericience of a move overseas (where the local weather is not, at present, sunny). The cost of living in my new HN is way above the UK, a few examples...Car insurance rates 5-7 times more than UK, car purchase tax (for 2nd hand vehicles) that totalled more than #1500 for 2 modest cars, weekly grocery shopping bills between #60-100 per week more expensive, residential phone line twice as much, I could go on, but I guess the scene has been set.

Yes this is, undeniably, a fantastic opportunity (professionally and socially) for my family and I, and I count myself exceptionally fortunate to be given that opportunity - do I think I should be #8-10,000 per year out of pocket for doing an essential duty for the UK MoD - absolutely not.

I'm sure under all allowances similar stories can be told but that just highlights the need to stay united on this and all push the same message to anyone that will listen. I repeat:

As a military team I think we all agree that whilst the allowance package should not provide anybody with profit, no serviceman should be financially penalised for carrying out a duty.

Cheers,

[Junglydaz]

@baby-spice

As a military team I think we all agree that whilst the allowance package should not provide anybody with profit, no serviceman should be financially penalised for carrying out a duty.


Well said.:D

[Winco]

Wrathmonk

I regret that you do need to get to specsavers Sir!
I have edited that post but you have my word that it was to correct two spelling mistakes only. No worries about the age thing, I think you are probably correct anyway.

The Nip

I am sure that they were all 'good old boys' during their times as JOs and probable as Sqn Ldrs and Wg Cdrs, but countless people on here will vouch, that many people change markedly when they begin to climb that ladder towards the top, and by the time they are approaching 1* level, they become almost unrecognisable to many of us, and the 'good old boy' has been replaced by someone quite different!

Should the head of the RAF be a pilot?? I am not sure anymore. I once would have said that it was an absolute necessity, but I'm just not sure. It saddens me to see so many VSOs unable or unwilling to make the point on behalf of the junior element of the services. I would have loved to have seen a 3* or 4* have the ba11s to stand up and tell the public that the services are at breaking point, but what do we hear??
.....................the sound of silence!! - says it all I suppose.

I'm not going to rant on about VSOs. My views on them are well documented and as I have said, I have taken quite a bit of stick for it. But I reiterate that unless some VSOs are prepared to stand up and fight, then it is a lost cause; and if that means that people call it a day, then I doubt if there will be much sleep lost amongst those responsible.

[Whenurhappy]

Intersting point about LOA - but as it has been cut by 31.8% since 1 Dec, there's not much left to target. But I agree with the sentiment about the old and bold who have hung on in Germany. I know one Sqn Ldr who's been here 15 years!

Why the rank differential? I don't know what the JSP says but twice as SBO on recent postings I have had to dig deep to help fund 'British' events, especially since RAA is a thing of the past.

Tax free fuel? That's because of the SOFA and why, inter alia, we don't pay local taxes. The system is funded by a levy on the sales of coupons. However much of BFG should be got rid of asap - the rules fail to acknowledge EU common borders, for example.

[The B Word]

My two-penneth...

...a reduction in ALL allowances of up to 25%

No cancellations, no change of qualifying criteria, no exceptions.

You heard it here first!

The B Word

[VinRouge]

To be honest, B word, that would be the fairest option for all tbh. It would allow for an increase back to the norm as soon as we get a recovery going.

Sometime around 2025. :mad:

[MATELO]

If cuts are deemed necessary then I hope it works both ways.

Are the Junior Rates going to get reimbursed for all the meals they pay for whilst at home over the weekend.

If so, will this be back dated.

[vecvechookattack]

If cuts are deemed necessary then I hope it works both ways.

Are the Junior Rates going to get reimbursed for all the meals they pay for whilst at home over the weekend.

If so, will this be back dated.

Certainly will....PAYD is the way ahead

[Biggus]

....not always!

PAYD won't be happening where I'm based, thank goodness!

[Climebear]

MATELO

RAF perosnnel on non-PAYD (CR) stations can now. They just submit a leave pass for the weekend (2 non-working days so not off ALA) on JPA and the food charges are stopped.

[Whenurhappy]

Well that seemed to kill off an otherwise interesting discussion...

[MaroonMan4]

Interesting to see this thread degenerate into a black hole.

So no one commented on the fact that just as our Prime Minister boarded a plane to praise our troops in Afghanistan that he elected to postpone the announcement of further financial cuts to military personnel until the New Year.

Was it too unpalatable for him or was there a sense of impending morale crumble within the very heart of Her Majesty's Armed Forces?

Forget the salami slicing of the big projects, I think that we should all look at JPA and start to add up all of the small little cuts, restrictions, rule changes and even some of the big cuts mooted out there (flying pay, CEA, HTD etc) - not forgetting the proposed pension changes.

All being slowly released, drip fed firstly in news rooms and then into admin offices around the country.

Mark my words, the subsequent slow exodus over the next few years (probably of the best quality personnel) will take a very long time to replace.

Good job that once we have withdrawn from Afghan that the Prime Minister will not have to commit any of HM Forces, as the world is so stable and anyway we will be adopting an isolationist policy by then - I certainly would not want the risk that he is about to own in both equipment cuts and now with the impending slow drip feed of allowance cuts.

These allowances ultimately add to the quality (and at times the quantity in key trades - aircrew, EOD, submariners, etc) of military personnel required for defence of this country with a hidden ability that H M Treasury and the Private Sector cannot even dream of adding to an excel spreadsheet or attempt to financially quantify - namely moral component and loyal military ethos.

When the military loyalty ethos is lost, I believe so does the good will that has historically resulted in a very flexible workforce that has been prepared (without question) to make the ultimate sacrifice for this country if required.

[Biggus]

Given the relative haste with which the SDR was rushed through, perhaps the reason for the delay in announcing changes to the allowances package isn't due to some sort of conspiracy - but rather simply because the allowances review hasn't been finished yet?

[VinRouge]

You wonder if that article in the torygraphwas leaked to see how severe the reaction would be amongst forces personnel... preparing the battlefield and all that.

[JliderPilot]

25% cuts? - Well I am not surprised, leak some of the worst bits then that will soften the blow. That seems to be the politicians method these days. For me I wish they would publish the redundancy terms / numbers and all the allowance cuts so we can all get back to work and stop faffing!

Regarding LOA I agree it needs an overhaul, someone commisioned from the ranks for instance (say a Flt Sgt) is now on less LOA than before. His experience level and family requirements / costs are not less; does not make sence.

Oh and by the way they are not 'sunshine tours' everyone can apply for them if they have the required skills / experience.:= Some of them also involve deploying to sandy places more frequently than the being back in the UK.

[Grumpy106]

Winco:

This utter nonesence (sic) about 'non aircrew' filling a 'flying related' post has done the flying community no favours at all. I know of FCs and even ATs who have kept their flying pay simply because someone has deemed that their 'new' posting is flying related. What a farce! I have heard and read the arguments that 'they may be required to rejoin the E-3 fleet therefore....' many times, and it is frankly a disgrace! There have been JO FCs (and a few senior ones also!) who are back in the ground environment, receiving more flying pay than front line aircrew on Op. The same goes for some ATs who have managed to cling onto their FP, and whatever your beliefs, that cannot be right.

I agree, but you are mistaken. There are no ex-AWACS FC personnel in the Grd Environment receiving Fg Pay. 'Flying related' posts are as rare as rocking horse poo, are all at Waddington in either the AWC or 56 Sqn and are currently being re-examined. If you know any different please let me know and I'll get onto my Desk Officer straight away and get my name down for one of these wonderful (if imaginary) posts. Now, if you took fg pay away from everyone in a ground tour, that would save quite a lot of money.:E

On a different note, and not to defend MPs as they are actually mostly undefendable, but there are only 650 of them claiming allowances, not over 100,000. Take a £ from each of them and you save £650, take a £ from each member of the Military and you save £100,000+. Even a numpty beancounter can see where the savings can be made most easily.

[Willard Whyte]

On a different note, and not to defend MPs as they are actually mostly undefendable, but there are only 650 of them claiming allowances, not over 100,000. Take a £ from each of them and you save £650, take a £ from each member of the Military and you save £100,000+. Even a numpty beancounter can see where the savings can be made most easily.

On the basis that the military couldn't make a bigger hash of running the country than 650 MPs, I see the potential to save 650 * £64(?),000 pounds per annum in wages alone. Add 30% for allowances and that's circa £50M/year.

[Whenurhappy]

Err, has anyone seen theis 'personal contribution for School Children' Visits' on their latest payslip? In my case (we live in a remote location abroad) it costs us GBP 1 per day. Not much, it seems, but that would pay for 3 return flights on a budget airline, if booked well in advance.

What the Lord giveth...

[Winco]

Grumps

I can't comment on who is receiveing what now as it is several years since I left, but I can assure you that it was hugely common practice for FCs to 'find' themselves a posting that had became a 'flying related' post.

There were many FCs that kept their FP under that scheme and indeed, even the ATs did the same. It was ridiculous. We had SNCO FCs, Officer FCs and SNCO ATs all receiving FP after they had left the fleet and returned to their main stream duties back on ground tours. If that no longer exists then I'm pleased. At one stage, we had a SNCO AT, on a ground tour, receiving more FP than a front line AEOp. Disgraceful.

What happens today I can't comment on, but 6 - 8 years ago it was more than common.

As for the idea that anyone NOT in a flying tour should lose their FP, I can't agree entirely. Lets take the case of those ex Nimrod Crews who, through no fault of their own find they have no aircraft to fly. Do you think we should kick them in the nuts even more by enforcing a pay cut on them also? What about the guy who, because of his aviating skills/knowledge has been earmarked for a ground tour somewhere for the benifit of the service. Is it fair to give him a pay cut too?? I don't think so. If you are in a ground tour and refuse to go back to flying then fine, take the FP away then, but not when the enforced grounding is for service reasons and is not the choice or the preference of the individual concerned.

[Whenurhappy]

Winco,

What was common practice in Branches and Trades 6 – 8 years ago is largely irrelevant, given the enormous changes that have taken place against unparallel op tempo. Winco, I suggest that you limit such mendacious comments to what is current. I wouldn’t comment about what is going on in the ‘Stan, even though I was there last year. Things change so very, very quickly.:oh:

[Grumpy106]

Winco,

Things have indeed changed, just about when I first left the fleet in fact (typical), and there are moves afoot to take FP away from all FCs who do not maintain currency (as it should be). We knew the rules when we went to the AWACS so cannot complain about them being enforced when we leave. I was playing devil's advocate with the 'everyone in a grd tour' comment, and I understand that for one tour followed by a return to fg that makes sense. But there are quite a few people around with the correct brevets who have not flown for years, are no longer current and never will be again, but still receive FP or are Spec Aircrew/PA, which seems strange to the majority of the (non-aircrew) RAF.

WW,

Couldn't agree more, but someone has to run the Country (no matter how badly) and they will still need paying.

[Blighter Pilot]

Which ever way you look at these cuts they will only really affect the average soldier, sailor and airman who is digging out blind to keep the op tempo while trying to save a marriage, pay a mortgage and give his or her kids the best schooling.

Bloated senior officers who don't really need all the allowances package couldn't give two hoots for the front-line troops.

Perhaps those policy makers should go and do 4 months in Helmland in a PB/CH47/C130.

Or maybe all those 1 Star officers could give up their chefs, gardeners and other staff.

:mad:

[Whenurhappy]

Blighter Pilot - you, too, are out of date.

The retinue of senior officers has been drastically reduced; moreover as a 'bloated senior officer' and (former) policy maker I have done my fair share of unpleasant dets (including two overseas moves this year alone). And I do care what happens to the guys and girls that make the Air Force, and the Navy and the Army tick.

That does not mean that I am not concerned about my own well-being, or that of my family - especially education, given the frequent moves that I have undergone. I certainly don't feel ashamed that my son goes to a minor public school - albeit subsidised, but at a considerable personal cost (emotional and financial).

[Blighter Pilot]

That does not mean that I am not concerned about my own well-being, or that of my family - especially education, given the frequent moves that I have undergone. I certainly don't feel ashamed that my son goes to a minor public school - albeit subsidised, but at a considerable personal cost (emotional and financial).


How will you and your son feel when the subsidy is removed?

Will you still think that everything in the MOD is fair and okay.

Perhaps I am closer to the front-line troops than yourself - the mood is not good, allowances could be the final straw.


(including two overseas moves this year alone)


I presume that these were not 4/6 month op dets?

I'm going out for my third 4 month OOA in the last 20 months, harmony is a thing of the past! On my return I will probably find I have lost my entitlement to CEA, had my HDT reduced and lost IE. Makes you really want to give your all for Queen and country, doesn't it?

Oh, and the last time I looked, Cmdt RAFC Cranwell had a chef, gardener and another member of domestic staff in addition to his/her PSO.:ok:

[Winco]

Grumps,

When you state that.......'Flying related' posts are as rare as rocking horse poo, are all at Waddington in either the AWC or 56 Sqn and are currently being re-examined. Are you actually saying that what I said happened (albeit 8 years ago or whatever) is still going on?? If it is, then it is outrageous.

Your comment.......We knew the rules when we went to the AWACS so cannot complain about them being enforced when we leave........ suggests that in fact. it is still going on (something which I understand is the case still) With the demise of the fleet, there cannot be a shortage of FCs filling a pic slot, so I do genuingly wonder why those of you that are on a ground tour even need to say current?? Do you still retain a 'cat from the SSU?? I was under the impression that staying current is a problem on the fleet, and if that is so, then how can the case be argued that any of those on ground tours need to stay current at all?

Whenurhappy
Sir, if you are who you claim to be, then you are the first VSO to own up to it on PPrune - so congratulations and respect to you for that. I wonder what your thoughts and views are on some of the more major topics on here such as Nimrod MRA4 or Harrier?? maybe you could enlighten us all with some info on how these (shameful) decisions are arrived at please?

Regards to all and a very Merry Christmas to everyone by the way!!

[Whenurhappy]

Winco,

I left Main Building (or Defence HQ as it is now titled) 12 months ago so cannot, with any degree of truthfulness and accuracy, state how some of the decisions arose. It would be fair to say, however, that the inter-Service rivalry that characterised previous years had subsided somewhat when the depth of financial poo was established. In particular both the RN and the RAF were in the same strategic position - we've both got high-end strategic assets currently 'not in the fight' that are vulnerable given the land-centric focus of our current campaign in AFG.

I'm not a VSO, but just one down from them. I have been fortunate to have had a very varied career working within the RAF and another Service, a number of Joint staff appointments and several out-of-Service type jobs, with the Foreign Office, contractors, NATO and the US. Perhaps the one thing that I will take away from this is that the higher one stands, the bigger the problems become. Almost inevitiably, these problems have a political dimension that is outwith our ability to tackle them. I saw little behaviour that typified the 'shiny arsed, self-serving Airships' which some poster allude to on this, and other, sites. Most, if not all, are committed to what is best for the RAF and for our people; unfortunately it is not always possible to put this into practice.

[Grumpy106]

Winco,

Apologies. The posts to which I refer are not fg related, they are fg posts, ie, jobs in which the incumbent is required to maintain currency and pass STANEVAL in order to maintain their specialist knowledge/experience for their posts. For example, OEU. In addition, there are still shortages within certain specialisations on the Sqn which require bolstering from the other units based at Waddo. As far as I know, and I stand by to be corrected, there are no FCs at Waddo receiving fg pay who are not current and subject to STANEVAL. The point remains, however, that there are still several PA/Spec A'crew personnel being paid the equivalent of fg pay who have not flown for years.

[camelspyyder]

PC to SCV is taken from you each time you apply for an SCV - even if you (like me) subsequently forget to do the actual claim!

However there has been a history on JPA of this not being taken from claimaints, resulting in some of us having to pay it back for most of the school terms in the last 5 years - you may be liable so it's worth checking.

CS

[Ali Barber]

David Cameron soothes backbench anger by promising reform of expenses system - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/conservative-mps-expenses/8204705/David-Cameron-soothes-backbench-anger-by-promising-reform-of-expenses-system.html)

and the recent massive rise in allowances awarded to themselves by the Eurocrats.

Gits the lot of them!

[Whenurhappy]

Camelspyyder - thanks for the tip. I cannot, for the life of me, fathom the pay statements (complicated by three moves this year!). I will try to get the information from JPAC. (Groan!).

Blighter pilot

No I would not be happy if I lost CEA or similar. Having shuttled around a hell of a lot this year (moved family twice, as well) I find myself in a post where it costs me more to live and I am paid less than I was in Whitehall. Am I happy about it? No. Would I vote with my feet if allowances are cut even further? Depends on the alternatives...

My visits to Theatre are short in my current appointment, but nonetheless I do them and speak to a lot of guys and girls when I am there. I do not pretend things are rosy; in comparison speak to anyone in a support role in any other government department or local authority. They are sh!tting themselves over pay freezes, longer hours, being TUPE'd or being sacked. Perhaps they are not being shot at (excluding, perhaps, the Greater Manchester Police) but nor is that part of their job description.

Corporately, we run this risk of compassion exhaustion in the public eye. Where has been the public outcry about the redundancies in the middle of the deepest economic recession for many decades? Yes it is tragic that guys are being killed and horribly maimed in Afghanistan, but there is a mood amongst some of the public that we Service people know that when we join and that it is one of the possible outcomes. Given how long we have been at war (for that is what it is), anyone who didn't like it could have left. Look at how Service personnel (predominantly Army) are portrayed in the media: PTSD'd up the ying-yang, abusive to partners, drunk and violent - vide recent episodes of 'Accused', 'Coronation Street', 'East Enders'... The images of (ex) soldiers attending EDL rallies. Where are the characters who are shown as kind, gentle, courageous, honest, sober..?

When genuine Service personnel are shown in the meedja, it is a part of a victim mentality of bravely overcoming multiple limb loss etc (which I do not decry) but this is how a significant percentage of the public view us. There have been exceptions, of course: the Rifleman who casually picked up a POM-Z device and threw it back; the navy medic who received the MM (the account of her 'casual' bravery made me bite my lip), our injured Chinook pilot, etc; but these are exceptions to the rule of media portrayal of service personnel.

Whether we like it or not, we have to suck up many of these cuts and should not expect much support from the wider public, who are facing similar crises in their own lives. The IO campaign to keep the role of the forces in the public eye needs to be maintained but should focus on what we do, rather than on sentimentalising victimhood.

WP

[Winco]

Whenurhappy

Sir, I agree with you almost 100% but there is a very subtle difference in all of the examples you give and the military, and it is this......

Every night on either national TV or on my own local Geordie TV I see interviews from very senior council officials, health trust officials, Police federation top brass........the list goes on and on and it happens every night. Without fail, they all express their concerns, fears and worries about the cuts they and their organisations are faced with. Most of them even understand that there is little or nothing that they can do, but it doesn't stop them from complaining in public and voicing their concerns.

So, my question is this:
Why have we not had a single RAF VSO stand up and make comment about what is going on with cuts to the RAF budget and our fleet of aircraft?? (same applies to the RN and Army of course)

These are the guys that you worked with up until recently, so you are probably the best placed to comment about that here. It displays contempt and a clear lack of concern and duty of care IMHO and shows that they don't have a pair of ba££s between them. It further enforces my view that those at the very top of the RAF are more concerned about their future appointments to the House of Lords, the board of BAes and so on.

Their lack of public condemnation or even comment is deplorable.

[Whenurhappy]

The simple answer is that media exposure of senior officers is heavily controlled by DGMC (Nick Gurr), under Ministerial direction. All public presentations given by 2* and above have to be vetted via a MINSUB. Similarly you don't see PUS of other Government Departments speaking out, either. That is left to the PPS or the Ministers responsible. Neither the Chief Executive of Loamshire County Council or the leader of Slagston Borough Council have these restrictions.

Recently a Station Commander was interviewed on TV about the impact of one particular SDSR cut and he gave, in my opinion, a cogent, sensible reply. He also got into deep poo as a result for speaking out on a Defence matter, rather than on a sS issue.

[Winco]

Whenurhappy, Very many thanks for that.

So, I suppose therefore, that what we are actually saying is that the Armed Forces, the boys and girls in it, JOs, SOs and even VSOs do not have a voice?? What an absolute tragedy.

Thank God I left when I did. That is indeed a damning state of affairs.

Winco

[Whenurhappy]

I'm sure there are posts left, right and centre now. DIB 2010/95 has just been issued on the new 'rules' for CEA.

Headline points:

· The link between Involuntarily Separated Status (INVOLSEP) and automatic eligibility to CEA for permanent assignments will be removed. This will mean that CEA claimants posted to MOD London, and certain designated positions within JFHQ (PJHQ) will no longer be eligible to claim CEA whilst serving unaccompanied.[1] (http://www.pprune.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=6125086&noquote=1#_ftn1)
· The claiming of CEA without accompanied service on the basis of historic RN regulations for previously designated seagoing billets will also cease. This will mean that, in future, Naval Service personnel permanently assigned to a previously designated seagoing billet who are ineligible for the transitional arrangements described below will be required to demonstrate their commitment to family mobility and accompanied service by moving their family home to the Base Port in order to retain continued entitlement to CEA, provided that all other eligibility criteria are met.
· Transitional arrangements have been agreed for existing CEA claimants serving unaccompanied whilst on permanent assignment to MOD London, designated positions within JFHQ (PJHQ) and Sea Service billets in Ships and Submarines, to retain the INVOLSEP concession for continued CEA eligibility until the end of their current assignment. Extant rules will then apply for subsequent appointments, therefore for the purpose of the assignment after serving INVOLSEP it will be assumed that a family move has occurred, even if the SP returns to a longstanding family home. Service personnel in possession of a permanent Assignment Order dated prior to this announcement and with a latest arrival date of prior to 1 Sep 11 to either MOD London, designated positions within JFHQ (PJHQ) and Sea Service billets in Ships and Submarines, and who intend to initially claim or to continue to claim CEA on the basis of the INVOLSEP provision, will be included in these transitional arrangements.

· The “Sibling Rule” will be removed from the CEA regulations. This will mean that in future, all children will be required to demonstrate their suitability for boarding for at least 3 terms before being allowed to transfer to day schooling, should the location of the family home permit.

· The Children’s Education Advisory Service (CEAS) will initiate a review of CEA entitlement where the claimant’s family home has not relocated during 2 consecutive assignments, rather than 3.
· Aggregation will be removed from the CEA regulations. This will mean that the ability to offset more expensive school fees against less expensive ones will be removed.

Hmm, a posting to Whitehall, with a bed-sit in Croydon or the kids going to some sink comprehensive gets my vote!

[Lima Juliet]

Maybe the kids will get a Uniform Allowance for the Sink Estate?

http://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/hprofile-ak-snc4/hs231.ash2/50414_2258585969_879867_n.jpg

[Green Bottle 2]

Has anyone heard any more about this? It seems to have gone very quiet after an initial flurry of activity.

GB2

[scan]

DIN to be released 20 Jan 11:(

[Jumping_Jack]

Neatly tied in with the NHS Reforms announcements....I guess they have patiently waited for their 'bad news day' to bury it.:ugh:

[Uncle Ginsters]

We'll all await tomorrow's announcements with baited breath then!

It's amazing lately how the crewroom chat is all about ATPLs and civvy interview technique rather than military aviation (and certainly not banter :})

One thing's for sure though - if all those who are licensed and able walk this year (which looks like happening in my part of the world) we will find ourselves with a definite reduction in capability.

Anyone for a sweepstake on when the Elastoplast FRI comes out to try to make amends?

[BEagle]

Anyone for a sweepstake on when the Elastoplast FRI comes out to try to make amends?But would anyone on the receiving end of such huge governmental kicks in the slats as are now being handed out (thanks to the legacy of that simpering little poodle Trust-me-Tone and the idiot Incapability Brown) ever trust the MoD ever again?

I think not.

[Bob Viking]

Far be it for me to disagree with you BEagle but I'd actually like to stay in! I'm not a career type but I could happily keep doing what I'm doing (flying that is) until I retire.
There are clearly many downsides (the MOD's apparent lack of loyalty being one of them!) but I don't think we can presume that everyone hates their job just because a few people are ranting on this site!
An FRI would be bloody lovely though!
BV:ok:

[Jayand]

Bob you are not the only one, but trust me there are plenty who do want out, the grass might not be greener, but people are sick of this grass!

[Owd Yella]

Frankly, the grass I'm eating at the moment tastes like someone has urinated on it. Surely the grass outside, if not quite as lush or green, isn't tainted by one's employer seeing them off!

Tomorrow will tell but there will be much unhappiness I think.

[Jumping_Jack]

Bob,

Sort out your spelling....'complete' is NOT spelled a-p-p-a-r-e-n-t

:ok:

[Flat-Rated@32c]

This has been an abused gravy-train for years, 3% of the folks taking 25% of the allowances budget := Many of the folks I know who receive CEA cheat the system, nod and a wink from the head and have their kids home at night anyway, and have not moved for a very, very long time. Good riddance to the current form of CEA I say!!!!! I do, however, think that there are a small number of genuine folks who use it correctly and deserve every penny, but I know non.
I too want to stay in the RAF, well over 33 years done and still relatively happy with my lot :)

[Canadian Break]

25%? Add at least another 25% depending on which part of the world you are serving in!

[Nomorefreetime]

Honest CEA.

I'm one, Son went to BS whilst in AKI Year 7, Posted back to UK Wilts at start of year 8. Perm accompanied detachement to current unit (70 ish miles away)at start of year 9, current job complete in summer 11 (option to extend another year). Poss 4 schools in 7 years. School is 144 miles from home so only see him during holidays.

Agree, if at one unit for most of your career then you should send kids to a LEA school. Gonna affect a lots of guys at my unit now.

[SirToppamHat]

Flat-Rated@32c

Three kids, all to same boarding schools. Closest we lived was 50 mins (on a really good day) whilst worst was about 7hrs plus.

I know many others in a similar position.

Personally, I can't think of anyone who cheats the CEA system - over the years, though, I've known of a couple of people who've kept quiet when posted to retain a quarter outside the regs.

If you feel so strongly about it, presumably you've reported accordingly?

STH

[peppermint_jam]

The good news briefs start at a rainy Norfolk airfield this morning. General consensus is expect everything to go, anything we keep is a bonus.

[Big Bear]

Get me out of London now please.....

[Jumping_Jack]

SDSR ALLOWANCES SAVINGS MEASURES


ISSUE

1. Allowances savings measures.

KEY POINTS


In his Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) statement, the Prime Minister announced that there would be cuts in Service and Civil Service allowances amounting to some £300M per year. For the Armed Forces, this represents £250M, from an allowance spend of approximately £880M per year, by Apr 14. About £80M of savings will be achieved as a result of a reduction in military manning as well as measures to reduce the movements of personnel. The remainder will come from changes in allowance eligibility and rates.

Changes are a necessary part of the Department’s contribution to the overall Government’s programme to reduce the deficit.

The purpose of allowances is to reimburse personnel for justifiable expenditure incurred either when on duty or as a result of the unique nature of Army life. The current financial position has placed pressure on the level of allowances that are affordable. Whilst there will be some reductions and changes, appropriate allowances will continue in the future.

The majority of changes will come into effect on 1 May 11. Where possible, measures have been mitigated by delaying the implementation of some changes by up to 2 years.

Where possible, allowance savings measures have been taken in accordance with the following principles:


all actual, unavoidable expenses incurred for Service reasons should be reimbursed;
where expense is incurred for Service reasons but there is some element of choice in incurring this expense, personnel should make a contribution towards it;
operations, mobility and separation should be the highest priorities for reimbursement;



lower earners should be protected as much as possible.

· Changes will be painful for some and in many cases will require adjustments to lifestyle. Individuals who believe they will be placed in financial difficulty should inform their Chain of Command who will direct them to the appropriate area for advice.

· For those changes to allowances that will take effect from 1 May 11, any rates not yet published will be promulgated no later than 28 Feb 11. Where allowance changes will take effect from 1 Apr 12, rates will be published at the appropriate time.

· Changes to the Commitment Bonus Scheme will take effect, for new entrants only, from the date of this announcement - a separate ABN will be issued.

· Changes to the Specialist Pay Reserve Banding system will take effect from 1 Apr 12.

SUMMARY OF KEY MEASURES

3. Home to Duty Travel (Public) (HDT (Public)). The personal contribution to HDT (Public) will increase from 1 mile to 3 miles from 1 May 11, from 3 to 6 miles from 1 Apr 12 and 6 to 9 miles from 1 Apr 13. The HDT (Private) personal contribution will remain unchanged at 9 miles.
a. This will mean that Army personnel who live in publicly funded accommodation less than these distances from their Duty Station will receive no financial support for the commute to and from work. The personal contribution for Service personnel who live in publicly funded accommodation more than these distances from their Duty Station will be 89p per day from 1 Apr 11, £1.78 per day from 1 Apr 12 and £2.66 per day from 1 Apr 13, and they will receive a contribution to the remainder of their travel costs.
b. Although it is recognised that in practice personnel have very little choice where they serve and, if they live in Service accommodation, where they are housed, it is considered reasonable that they should expect to bear broadly the same costs as their civilian counterparts (9 miles is the average distance travelled by UK workers).
4. Disturbance Allowance (DA). The rates for Privately Owned and Privately Rented families’ accommodation will be aligned to the Service Families Accommodation (SFA) rate. All DA rates will be reduced by 10% to £966 for SFA and £83 for SLA. The child element will also reduce from £153 to £75 per eligible child. The new rates will apply to all moves which take place on or after 1 May 11, irrespective of when the claim for DA is submitted.
5. Incidental Expenses (IE). IE in the UK and Overseas will be removed, except for those Service personnel hospitalised as in-patients.
a. IE reimburses expenditure on laundry and dry cleaning, phone calls home, a newspaper, TV access, internet access etc during periods of temporary absence of up to 30 days. It is judged that, on the whole, when such expenditure is incurred it is primarily associated with personal choice, rather than specifically relating to a Service need. Therefore, it is no longer considered appropriate for the Service to provide recompense for such activity.
b. However, the allowance will be retained for hospitalised personnel[1] (http://www.pprune.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=6190777#_ftn1) to assist their return to fitness. Significant additional costs can accrue while in hospital particularly telephone and television costs.
6. Day Subsistence (DS). The upper limit for UK DS will be reduced from a capped maximum of £26.28 to £25 per day (4.9% reduction). Overseas DS (which is currently set at different rates depending on the country) will be reduced by 4.9%, which is proportionate to the reduction in UK DS.
7. Local Overseas Allowance (LOA)[2] (http://www.pprune.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=6190777#_ftn2).
a. From 1 May 11, worldwide changes to LOA are as follows:
(1) The element of LOA which covers 9 nights per year in hotel accommodation, in lieu of long weekends with friends and family in UK (known as “Bett Nights”), will be revised. In recognition of the introduction of Get You Home (Overseas)(GYH(O) in 2007, 3 of the 9 nights will be removed from the LOA construct, leaving provision for 6 “Bett Nights”;
(2) Revised UK spend data will be used to update the LOA rate tables. This will result in a reduction in LOA as the latest data indicates that the cost of living in the UK has risen;
(3) The current rank-based 13 level LOA Factor Plan will be revised to 3 bands of LOA per LOA Main Station[3] (http://www.pprune.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=6190777#_ftn3). This reflects the fact that LOA is designed to contribute to the necessary additional costs of living overseas, rather than compensating for personal lifestyle choices. The 3 bands of the new Factor Plan will be as follows:
Factor
Ranks
1.0
Cpl and below and 2Lt/Lts
1.1
Sgt – WO1, Capts and Majs
1.2
Lt Cols and above


(4) The Exercise or Field Conditions rate of LOA will reduce from 50% to 40% of the single/unaccompanied rate, and the Temporary Duty LOA rate will reduce from 75% to 60% of the single/unaccompanied rate. This will result in a reduction in Exercise or Field Conditions and Temporary Duty rates in all locations;
(5) LOA will no longer be paid for dependant children over 18 or those who have completed the A level stage of education.
b. From 1 Apr 12, additional worldwide changes will be made to LOA Conventions as follows:
(1) Decreased mileage and vehicle ownership in UK as identified in the DASA UK Expenditure and Lifestyle Survey will be introduced into the Conventions;
(2) The current 20 minutes of peak-time telephone calls will be replaced with an indexed overseas package in all LOA Main Station areas;
(3) The babysitting provision will be reduced by 50% in all LOA Main Station areas;
(4) The Domestic Assistance element of LOA will be removed.
The overall effect of these global changes to conventions is that LOA rates in most locations are likely to fall, subject to FFR changes and other calculations.
c. From 1 Apr 12, additional changes will be made to LOA Conventions for North West Europe (NWE)[4] (http://www.pprune.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=6190777#_ftn4) as follows:
(1). The Car Buy/Sell element will be removed from the LOA Conventions for NWE. Although this will result in a reduction in this element within the LOA rates in NWE, it will be compensated for by the introduction of an entitlement to claim duty travel costs on assignment to and from UK to NWE;
(2) The remaining 6 “Bett Nights” will be removed from the LOA Conventions for NWE. This will result in a reduction in this element within the LOA rates but will be compensated for by the provision of an additional 2 GYH(O) journeys per year.
8. Living Out Supplemented Rates to LOA (LOSLOA). In future the daily rate of LOS will be aligned to the UK Food and Incidentals Allowance (FIA) rate, adjusted by the indexed LOA shopping basket food element, less that already paid in the single/unaccompanied rate of LOA. Eligibility criteria will also be adjusted to ensure that maximum use of Service messing, where appropriate, is made. Personnel accommodated within 3 miles of their Unit’s Service messing facilities will not be paid LOS. This will lead to personnel, with reasonable access to Service messing, losing their current entitlement from 1 May 11.
9. School Children’s Visits (SCV). The parental contribution to SCV will be increased from 50 miles to 100 miles per single journey, and the allowance will be withdrawn for children who have completed the A level stage[5] (http://www.pprune.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=6190777#_ftn5) of education.
10. Motor Mileage Allowance (MMA). All 3 MMA rates will be aligned with the lower HMRC approved mileage rate, currently 25p per mile. The MMA Private Car Rate (MMA(PCR)) has been set at this level since 1 Apr 10, and MMA Converted Leave Rate (MMA(CLR)) will also be aligned to the lower HMRC approved mileage rate. Official Duty Rate (ODR) will be removed from the regulations.
11. Get You Home (GYH). All GYH allowances are generated by MMA CLR and will reduce accordingly to 25p per mile (from 26p for GYH (Travel)(GYH(T)) and 31p for other GYH rates).
12. GYH (Early Years) (EY) and GYH (Early Years) (Overseas Assistance) (EY)(OA) will be removed at the end of Phase 1 Training or at the age of 18, whichever is the later. This measure will retain the allowance for those young personnel who need it most, whilst reducing provision for older persons on the trained strength.
13. Recruitment and Retention Allowance (London) (RRA(L)). From 1 Apr 12 RRA(L) will be removed from all Sgts and above. The continued retention of RRA(L) for Cpls and below will be subject to AFPRB recommendations.
14. Food and Incidentals Allowance (FIA). FIA will be reduced from £12.41 to £8.50 per day.
a. The insurance and cleaning elements are to be removed from the FIA formula, the absence factor increased and the food basket priced from outside Central London, resulting in the new rate.
b. Service personnel accommodated within 3 miles of their Unit’s Service Messing facility will be ineligible for FIA.
15. Special Messing Allowance (SMA). SMA will be benchmarked at 75% of the rate of Subsistence Allowance for the relevant country.
16. Privately Arranged Passage (PAP). All PAP claims will be based on pre-booked non-flexible economy class air fares only, with accommodation and subsistence elements removed from the formula.
20. Specialist Pay. Specialist Pay Reserve Banding (RB) is currently paid at 100% of Specialist Pay for the first 3 years, 75% in year 4, 50% in year 5 and 25% in year 6, after which Specialist Pay ceases to be paid.
a. From 1 Apr 12, Specialist Pay RB will be reduced from the current 6-year system to a 3-year system where a rate of 100% of Specialist Pay is paid for the first 2 years, 50% in year 3 and zero in year 4.
b. From 1 Apr 12, the Premature Voluntary Release (PVR) rate of Specialist Pay will be reduced from 50% to 0%.
c. JSP 754 will be updated in Apr 11 to reflect this future change.
d. Separately, all current forms of Specialist Pay will be reviewed by the AFPRB during 2011.
21. Commitment Bonus (CB). There will be no change to the Enhanced CB scheme for personnel who started Phase 1 training prior to the date of this announcement (these personnel will be entitled to the full benefits of this scheme). From the date of the announcement, the CB 2010 scheme will be introduced for ORs who begin Phase 1 training on or after this date. A separate DIN and ABN outlining this change will be published shortly. The CB 2010 scheme for new entrants will be set at a maximum value of £7,500 (gross) for eligible personnel.
22. Financial Incentive Schemes. Recognising that Force Structures will be changing as a result of recent SDSR announcements, Financial Incentive Schemes (eg Golden Hellos, Financial Retention Incentives, Rejoin Bounties and Transfer Bounties) are now being reviewed to ensure that the requirement is extant. Information on changes to any existing schemes will be promulgated as soon as reviews have been completed. Personnel should be clear that whilst they may be able to demonstrate eligibility to receive such awards, it is for DM(A) to determine entitlement based upon suitability and structural requirement.

[1] (http://www.pprune.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=6190777#_ftnref1) Hospitalised in the UK or overseas but not when hospitalised in British Field Hospitals which are provided with Deployed Welfare Package (DWP) facilities.

[2] (http://www.pprune.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=6190777#_ftnref2) All predictions on LOA rate reductions/increases are predicated on existing Fixed Forces Rate of exchange, which fluctuate.

[3] (http://www.pprune.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=6190777#_ftnref3) The Factor Plan for Small Stations will be considered separately during FY 11/12.

[4] (http://www.pprune.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=6190777#_ftnref4) This provision relates to France, Belgium, Germany and Netherlands.

[5] (http://www.pprune.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=6190777#_ftnref5) This also includes ‘Highers’ in Scotland.

[Big Bear]

RLE,

No. changes take effect even if you're already in post :(

Not unexpected, but I'll be moving on as soon as possible, and won't be coming back to town.

Just got to find someone who hasn't seen the new rates to replace me :E

[Uncle Ginsters]

I guess that's the sound of tumbleweed then!
:mad:

We'll have to await the 2011 Specialist Pay review to see, but on the basis of that, any Specialist in a ground tour needs to become a Wg Cdr to recoup the lost FP from the 3rd year...of course, it depends on what constitutes 'Flying-related duties' and whether they even count as the dust settles.

[Big Bear]

Stunned silence

[NUFC1892]

Doesn't seem to be too bad to me, I was expecting much worse. Bottom line is I am still in a job I enjoy and likely to remain so until I decide otherwise. Whilst some of the cuts are pretty deep I don't expect a queue of airman claiming financial hardship to be forming at my door anytime soon.

[Top Bunk Tester]

b. From 1 Apr 12, the Premature Voluntary Release (PVR) rate of Specialist Pay will be reduced from 50% to 0%.


Do I read that to mean if you PVR you lose ALL your Flying Pay (PA won't be affected I assume) :uhoh:

[GlobalTravellerAT]

It's all hoop, I'm currently at sunny strawberry and am here for over a year for trg and as no SFA available I'm in SSSFA. Having to pay for extrtionate fuel to get to work just because no accomadtion available to which I am entitled. :(!!

[Climebear]

Do I read that to mean if you PVR you lose ALL your Flying Pay (PA won't be affected I assume)

Yes (and, I believe, your assumption is correct)

[greenhaven]

Notwithstanding redundancy, etc a PVR followed by working your 12 months is going to be pretty uncomfortable financially now (especially those on the higher rates). I can see a few legal challenges inbound on that one.

I'm not arguing for or against the fairness of it, just stating facts! :)

[VinRouge]

Couple of points as far as I see it.

1) PVR waiting times are pretty much 1-2 months at the mo, and to be honest, if peeps are going to head off to the airlines job guaranteed, I daresay they dont care. In fact, PVR times are so short you can guarantee a job on the outside before you hit the button. The industry is going to take off big style and the question will soon turn from "how can we make people leave" to "how can we keep people in?" I think they are going to work on the basis of pay an FRI when you need to keep people, make it $hit at all other times. :ugh:

2) The cuts arent as bad as I expected. I expected HTD(Private) and DA to go completely. CEA revision cant be argued to be unfair, its simply being applied "as designed" i am afraid.

3) For all those that sold their soul to the devil, trying to climb the greasy pole, I say bad luck, and mean it. We are about to see a pretty extensive net migration of high quality employees (senior rank) to the civil sector. The sensible ones leave the sinking ship via a lifeboat before she goes down, not after.

Anyone got the number for Bristol groundschool, failing that, truckmaster? :}

If they F*ck our pensions, they are going to have a pretty large retention issue overnight I would suggest.

[JTIDS]

So a flying pay system which means anyone who can do the maths will fight not to get promoted... brilliant.

[Roland Pulfrew]

So the military looses 1/3 of our allowances and at the same time we get this in The Daily Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/8271377/MPs-protest-at-ludicrous-request-to-sacrifice-pay-rise-during-austerity-drive.html)

A couple of lovely quotes from the article:

the Leader of the House, said that MPs would be asked to show “restraint” at a time when public sector workers were subject to a pay freeze. Aren't MPs public sector workers then?

A senior Labour backbencher, who did not want to be named, added: "We have an independent body looking at our expenses, and we have an independent body setting our pay," they said. "It is a very modest pay rise and it should go through." No wonder he didn't want to be named.:rolleyes:

Separately, it was announced that MPs serving on Commons committees would receive £800,000 to take part in overseas visits which have attracted criticism in the past for amounting to “junkets”.

[iRaven]

PVR (or RET!) is safe at 50% until Apr 12. Here's a more reader friendly version of the cuts...

KEY POINTS:

• The Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) set out a requirement to reduce expenditure on Service and Civil Service allowances amounting to some £300M per year. Minister for Defence Personnel, Welfare and Veterans, Andrew Robathan, today announced the package of measures to be implemented for the Armed Forces.

• Except where specifically stated these changes will take effect from 1 May 2011.

Annex A – At-a-glance summary of changes

Subsistence Allowances

Day Subsistence (DS) - reduced from 1 May 11
- UK DS reduced from £26.28 to £25 per day
- Overseas DS reduced by 4.9%

Incidental Expenses (IE) - removed from 1 May 11
- except for personnel who are hospitalised

Food and Incidentals Allowance (FIA) - reduced & eligibility change from 1 May 11
- Reduced from £12.41 to £8.50 per day
- Personnel accommodated within 3 miles of their unit's messing facility will be ineligible

Special Messing Allowance (SMA) - rate calculation changes from 1 May 11
- SMA will be set at 75% (set against the Overseas Subsistence Allowance for each country)

Travel Allowances

Motor Mileage Allowance (MMA)

Reduced/removed from 1 May 11 - MMA Private Car Rate and MMA Converted Leave Rate to be aligned with the lower HMRC approved mileage rate, currently 25p per mile

Removed from 1 May 11 - MMA Official Duty Rate (MMA (ODR)) removed from regulations

Privately Arranged Passage (PAP) - reduced & elements of formula removed from 1 May 11
- PAP refunds based on pre-booked non-flexible economy class air fares only, with accommodation and subsistence elements removed from the formula 1 May 11

School Children's Visits (SCV) - reduced from 1 May 11
- Parental Contribution to SCV increased from 50 to 100 miles per single journey. Allowance withdrawn post A-levels.

Home to Duty Travel (HDT) - reduced Personal contribution increased from:
1-3 miles from 1 May 11
3-6 miles from 1 Apr 12
6-9 miles from 1 Apr 13

Separation allowances

Get You Home (Travel) (GYH(T)) - reduced to 25p per mile (from 26p for GYH(T) and 31p for other GYH rates) from 1 May 11

Get You Home (Early Years) (GYH(EY)) and GYH(EY(Overseas Assistance)) - restricted - to be removed on the commencement of Phase 2 Training or at the age of 18, whichever is later, from 1 May 11

Get You Home (Seagoers) (GYS(S)) - will be reduced from a maximum of 12 to 10 journeys per leave year from 1 May 11

Location Allowances

Local Overseas Allowance (LOA)

13 level rank based LOA Factor Plan reduced to 3 bands, LOA convention of 9 paid hotel nights reduced to 6 - from 1 May 11

Exercise/Field Conditions rate of LOA reduced from 50% to 40% of the Single/Married Unaccompanied Full Rate - from 1 May 11

Temporary Assignment and Seagoing LOA rates reduced from 75% to 60% of Single/Married Unaccompanied Full Rate - from 1 May 11

Other LOA conventions revised to more closely reflect current lifestyles, and removal of elements covered by other provisions - from 1 Apr 12

Living Out Supplement to LOA (LOSLOA) - calculation method replaced & eligibility change from 1 May 11

Daily rates of LOS replaced with adjusted Food and Incidentals Allowance rates.
Personnel accommodated within 3 miles of their Unit messing facility will be ineligible for LOSLOA. LOSLOA recipients will no longer pay the Daily Food Charge

Recruitment and Retention Allowance (London (http://militarydiscounthotels.laterooms.com/en/p9405/wl/k16295585_london-hotels.aspx)) (RRA(L)) - restricted from 1 Apr 12
- Allowance removed from OR5s and above including all commissioned ranks 1 Apr 12

Relocation Allowances

Disturbance Allowance (DA) - reduced from 1 May 11
- All rates reduced by 10%, child element reduced by 51%: New rates will be - SFA £966, SLA £83, Child Element £75.

Education

Continuity of Education Allowances - changes to eligibility, governance and rules
- Changes already announced in Dec 10, effective from 1 Apr 11

Pay

Specialist Pay Reserve Banding

Specialist Pay Reserve Banding (RB) reduced from 6 to 3 year system - from 1 Apr 12

Premature Voluntary Release (PVR) rate of specialist pay reduced from 50% to 0% - from 1 Apr 12

Commitment Bonus (CB) reduced by 50% for new entrant ORs - from 20 Jan 11

Financial Incentive Schemes (FIS)
FIS such as Golden Hellos to ensure there remains a requirement - to be reviewed

[Canadian Break]

Check out the cuts in LOA. If you are in Germany then when the reduction last summer is added to the reduction imposed today your LOA will have reduced by some 75%. Eye watering stuff!

[humpndump]

With the new rules regarding specialist pay, if someone PVRs/RETs, are they still expecting people to carry out that duty unpaid?? I can't say I would.




HnD:eek:

[Mr C Hinecap]

are they still expecting people to carry out that duty unpaid??

Still paid - just not the flying allowance?

[ghostnav]

Had there been a cut of 25% across the board, I could have accepted the argument that savings need to be made. But looking at the arguments put forward for some of the cuts, this is nothing more than a bad excuse.

LOA - the UK is so more expensive now with the increases in VAT, fuel etc. Where was the support when VAT in Germany went up 3%, when the euro increased prices overnight; hey its more expensive overseas too - even now!!!

Cut IE - easy when you are in the UK - try doing the same thing for nothing when you are across a border in Europe! It costs.

Why have 3 rates of LOA? Why not just have one!

So SP is now going to be cut IN the tour you have to do on the ground! Bye!!

Those serving overseas on behalf of UK PLC are taking the cut. Now, let's see what cuts are being made on MP visits overseas??

[Foghorn Leghorn]

Prior to this announcement a mate was telling me, if I understood it correctly, that if you are on the lower rate of flying pay, when you PVR you then go to 50% of that pay band. Whereas, those on the middle and upper rates either stay on the middle rate or drop to the middle rate. Is this correct? If so, this announcement seems a bit unclear. It would appear that with the increase in civil aviation market activity it could leave us short on aircrew.

[minigundiplomat]

Prior to this announcement a mate was telling me, if I understood it correctly, that if you are on the lower rate of flying pay, when you PVR you then go to 50% of that pay band. Whereas, those on the middle and upper rates either stay on the middle rate or drop to the middle rate. Is this correct? If so, this announcement seems a bit unclear. It would appear that with the increase in civil aviation market activity it could leave us short on aircrew.


It is my understanding that after today, all who PVR will receive zero FP.

[rock34]

Personally, I think it's better than expected. Could have been far worse.

[Party Animal]

Speaking as someone who is about to take a massive hit from 1 May -

Hitting the public sector where it hurts both in financial and redundancy terms could be easier to understand if it really did help to prevent UK plc from going to the wall. If we really are staring bankruptcy in the face, then fair enough.

However,

We are told by our political leadership that our economy is dire and cuts are essential to stop the ship sinking. When anyone asks why then, have we been able to increase our overseas aid money by a huge margin?, the answer is that we are still the 4th richest economy in the world and relatively 'stinking rich' so of course it beholds us to give increases to China??, India!! and every other corrupt African nation that uses our taxpayers money to buy new guns for its military juntas etc etc..

Secondly and as mentioned by RP above, it seems our 'public sector' is a variable feast. So if MMA is a set rate, this should be across every government department equally. Not the case now with UK MOD LOA rates being completely different to the FCO (as an example) and of course the MP pigs with noses in allowances troughs saying one thing and doing another.

WTF over?

[Mach the Knife]

So, this little lot should make the manning reduction task easier. The message is very clear to me; if unsuccessful when volunteering for redundancy, get your PVR in ASAP to be out before 2012. It will be very interesting to see how many volunteers there are for redundancy now the civil market is showing some green shoots. The tricky bit will be stemming the flow; I predict a haemorrhage of pilots and engineers in quite a short timescale. In many crew room visits I have made recently the only ones not openly stating intent to leave when they could were the Sqn Boss and the very junior guys who did not yet have enough hours for a CPL/IR; and they were doing what they could to get them! Sadly this won’t worry the current posters, they’ll have been posted by the time the muck really hits the fan.

[Lockstock]

I look forward to the FRI in 2013 then..! :ok:

[rock34]

Lots of people within this military side of the forum are coming out with comments such as 'airline recruiting is starting up' and 'aircrew will be leaving by the bus load and walking into airline jobs' etc etc.

A quick look in one of the recruiting forums comes up with this quote, "This market is dead for several years (10 years at least)! Have you seen the number of unemployed pilots flooding this market?? airlines have enough pilots for the next 20 years".

Do you believe that these jobs will soon be out there or is it a good healthy dose of optimism / bravado? Genuine question - it's not going to affect me, just curious!

[dallas]

As a bizjet manager we're recruiting, but very cautiously and selectively, cherry-picking the people with the quals we want. We're regularly approached by ab initios and some old sweats with many of the former willing to 'work for food' with the hope of a TR in the longer term. Experience is hard to find, but it's civvy experience that's most useful to us, enabling people to become productive in short order - 2000hrs on Tornados or even VC10 just wouldn't get an interview.

[Brewers Droop]

Personally, I think its better than expected

Rock 34

Not from my overseas vantage its not. For us, this is a big LOA cut on top of....a big LOA cut. But its not just LOA, add in the other cuts and its looking pretty gloomy on the financial side here. Add in changes outside the allowances and its not a pretty picture. There are some great opportunities overseas but the positives versus negatives have just slid a long way into the red.

What is disapointing is most of us have had full size goal posts not just moved mid tour, but sold and replaced with 5-a-side ones.

[Uncle Ginsters]

Rock,
Is that why BALPA reps are on TV giving interviews explaining that the market is in trouble because no ab initio guys can afford the £100k that it costs to self-fund an ATPL these days - that quote is PPRuNe tosh of the highest order, and i have that from the airline HR horse's mouth.:ok:

[Tilt&Gain]

Can I clear up the RB thing for all:

From Apr 2012 all those posted to a non flying or flying-related post will get full FP for 2 years, 50% in year 3 and nothing thereafter.

At present, about 95% of aircrew ground appointments are classed as 'Flying-related' - so they attract FP at the full rate, for the entire time in post. This change might look bad if you do not know the whole picture but it will not affect many of us at all.

For those few that undertake a tour in a non-flying related post will have to make sure they move on within 2 years - which is the norm already.

While I agree some of the cuts are pretty depressing it is not worth getting wrapped around the axle over the RB thing.

[rock34]

Fully understand that BD, but I do believe that we all could have been worse off. Obviously there are going to be those who lose out more.

Uncle, If that's the case then good luck to those that try it out. I genuinely hope that people don't make a snap decision and get severely disappointed.

[Lima Juliet]

Tilt&Gain

No so sure you're correct there fella:

From Apr 2012 all those posted to a non flying or flying-related post will get full FP for 2 years, 50% in year 3 and nothing thereafter

Here is what the regulations say about reserve bands:

For the first 6 years away from an SP or SP-Related posts, a Reserve Band will be paid. For the first 3 years, at 100% full rate
(in exceptional circumstances cases may be submitted to extend entitlement to retain full rates beyond the first 3 years). 75% of
the full rate in the 4th year, 50% of the full rate in the 5th year and 25% of the full rate in the 6th year. Payment will then cease (at
this point the individual would have been away from an SP or SP-related post for 6 years). Personnel who submit PVR will be
placed on the 50% rate or remain on the 25% rate if already in payment.

Now the latest announcement says:

Specialist Pay Reserve Banding

Specialist Pay Reserve Banding (RB) reduced from 6 to 3 year system - from 1 Apr 12

Premature Voluntary Release (PVR) rate of specialist pay reduced from 50% to 0% - from 1 Apr 12


So I would expect the new regulations on 1 Apr 12 to read something like:

For the first 3 years away from an SP or SP-Related posts, a Reserve Band will be paid. For the first 2 years, at 100% full rate. 50% of
the full rate in the 3rd year. Payment will then cease after year 4 (at this point the individual would have been away from an SP or SP-related post for 4 years). Personnel who submit PVR will cease to receive SP at that point until exit.

A big difference to what you stated. The SP-Related posts are still good for 'resetting the clock' as far as I'm aware.

LJ

[Farfrompuken]

Okay, so I read it that if I PVR before 1 Apr 12, I'll get 50% SP until my exit date, PVR after that date, I get zip.

Or do you have to be out the service by 1 Apr 12 to avoid the extra hit?

[Tilt&Gain]

LJ,

Isn't that exactly what I said?

Year 1: 100%
Year 2: 100%
Year 3: 50%
Year 4+: 0%

I only discussed the issue when not in a flying or flying related post - nothing about clocks resetting as this implies you are in an SP post, therefore entitled to full SP.

I dsidn't discuss PVR as I thought it was fairly self-evident: You press the button, SP disappears. It is a retention incentive after all and if the Service are not retaining you then why should it be paid?

[VinRouge]

Well, if the deskie was going to do the decent thing,

Flying related posts would be a maximum of 2 years. once this time is up, I suppose all those on Spec Aircrew pay band instead of receipt of flying pay are going to have to do the desk jobs...

Kind of defeats the object of Spec Aircrew/Professional Aviator really doesnt it? :ugh::ugh::ugh: Also completely screws the idea that we get people in desk jobs for longer. Why will anyone want to go and do the aerosystems course for example, if they are going to take a pay cut for the priveledge of a 30% pay cut to cover a procurement job?

I know if I get a cut in flying pay, with the missus potentially dropping a sprog and on single income, I am going to be in serious financial difficulty pretty quickly...

[Just This Once...]

It is a retention incentive after all and if the Service are not retaining you then why should it be paid?

I'll answer - QR's state that the purpose is to 'attract & retain' and it is the 'attract' bit that makes flying pay unique. All remuneration is designed to retain but we only reduce a branch specific remuneration change on PVR in a few areas. If SP has attracted someone to a specific job then why should it be withdrawn when they give notice to leave? If this becomes the accepted norm why not introduce it for others?

Sqn Ldr doctor on PVR could serve out PVR on regular sqn ldr pay?
Wg Cdr lawyer could serve out PVR on regular wg cdr pay?
Flt Lt priest could serve out PVR on regular flt lt pay?
PAS AEO could serve out PVR on regular flt lt pay?
Chf Tech AGE could serve out PVR without crew pay?
Pay freeze and no increments for any service personnel on PVR?
Pay freeze and no SP for any service personnel exercising an option?

It's only 3 years since Manning were fighting the reduction in FP on PVR as it had the unintended consequence of squeezing more people out at option points. With a declining head-count the long term strategy is to 'soften' option points to help 'profile' exits.

Leaving the Service is not a crime but the financial punishment is portraying it as one. A friend of mine has just finished serving out a PVR even though he will fall short of earning his wg cdr pension and has taken a major hit to his pay. He would love to continue his career but the unexpected death of his wife leaves him as a single parent and he now views his status as incompatible with Service life. Whilst single parent families do exist in the RAF it still seems harsh to stop his FP and hit his pension & gratuity.

Setting aside the redundancy rounds for a moment (as these are long-term regulation changes) we will have a continuing Service need to pull personnel through option points. The 'leave at an option and we will give you full pay as you serve out your time plus full pension & gratuity' vs the option of 'serve a little longer and when you do go we will extract £15k+ of pay and reduce pension & gratuity' seems a poor 'reward' for serving longer. Our current sticking-plaster is to offer an FRI - giving with one hand to offset the stupidity of the other limb.

[SirToppamHat]

Just this Once:
QR's state that the purpose is to 'attract & retain'

To be controversial then, what percentage of those applying for aircrew employment would withdraw their application if FP were withdrawn in toto?

How many 'future pilots' would waive or sign-up to a 50% cut in FP if it meant the difference between gaining a training place and not?

It's perhaps a different issue for those already in receipt, but I doubt there would be a significant drop-off in applications for places (from outside the Service at least) were one of these lines taken.

STH

[dallas]

I agree with STH re: newcomers. The market is bulging with abs who just want to fly (albeit because quite a lot already have rich parents), which is why the likes of Ryanair can get away with charging them for everything from interview to uniform.

Getting them in through the door wouldn't be the problem; it'd be keeping them past their 'wonder years' point as they get pi$$ed off with the superfluous stuff and compare conditions with their mate at BA. However the counter argument is the promotion ladder would keep pay on the rise for the few, with a steady stream of youth in/out on the shop floor. Depends on who's 'vision' :yuk: is en vogue right now as to the future model AF they want. But don't doubt there are thousands of kids on the streets with a PPL or better who aren't too arsed about FP, pensions and other dull stuff.

[teeteringhead]

JTO...
it still seems harsh to stop his FP and hit his pension & gratuity... FP has no effect on pension or gratuity, which are all related to basic pay (stand fast PA). Or did I misunderstand....

[VinRouge]

Problem is, the way they have worked the system, if you get promoted, it entails a pay CUT!

Why would you stick round at PJHQ for a long tour if you are going to take a 20% cut in your total pay to stick around? Anyone contempating a "push" yesterday in work pretty much were of the attitude F@ck it, lets get the groundschool going.

This is pretty poorly thought out in terms of retention, I know they are trying to get rid of people in the near future, but once the wind changes on the civil market, you can bet your bottom dollar there is going to be a major rush for the exits. Lots of peeps I know are not constraining themselves to the UK, and with the middle east/far east markets starting to grow, a slow trickle of expertise is going to become a tidal wave pretty damned quickly...

:ugh:

[Tilt&Gain]

VR,

What pay cut? As long as the post is marked as flying-related (which nearly all are as I mentioned above) there will be no effect on pay.

[dogstar2]

We have no union to protect current working conditions and co senior chaps jumping up and down looking after us either. It is all extremely disappointing.

[Uncle Ginsters]

T&G,
I fear the issue of what constitutes a Flying-Related post could be the devil in the detail.

For me, it follows that any post requiring aircrew experience is Flying Related. An Ops job is Flying related but can also be filled by the Ops Spt branch, as can most others when it comes down to it, so you could argue that they don't get Fg Pay so why should a Fly(P)? Does anyone know how this is defined?

[VinRouge]

T+G, how are they going to achieve a 10 million saving if 95% of the jobs out there are safe for flying pay? It doesnt make sense. I have a sense of foreboding that actually, we are shafted and that all the rumours that they were going to make it as unpleasant as possible are true.

I notice there was not mention of cuts to Star rank chefs and drivers as part of the allowances review? How about first class travel for them?

For a paltry 10 million saving (whats that, 2X pilot training to LCR status?) , they are going to force a huge change in attitude in the workplace. For all the effort the boys have gone to over the past 13 years, just as we thought there was light at the end of the tunnel, they are going to potentially put us in a tight financial spot, completely unacceptable.

I think they are about to see loyalty is a 2 way street in a big way. If they touch our pensions, I dare say there will be carnage.

[Top Bunk Tester]

Just This Once:

PAS AEO could serve out PVR on regular flt lt pay?


PAS is NOT SP, it is a totally separate pay range, so a Flt Lt AEO on the PAS receives no SP and therefore the cut would not affect him/her at all.

[VinRouge]

TBT, thats going to be interesting from a legal standpoint I would suggest.

[Top Bunk Tester]

VR, Although no longer serving, it is my understanding and I stand by to be shot down, that PAS is complete remuneration package and once you have done 5 years (I think) on that spine then nothing can be taken away from it. Your pension, gratuity and any redundancy packages are based on this full salary, there is no Flying Pay element to reduce or take off, the only way to reduce this package is to revert you to your original T&Cs which is basic salary + FP.

Awaiting incoming

[Whatsthatknocking]

What about the poor B:mad:rs not thru' the 5 yr window? What might happen to them I wonder..........

None of this makes good reading, rumour or not.......

[VinRouge]

Effectively, by ensuring PA dont get any financial penalty through a desk posting, surely what they have created is a scheme whereby Professional Aviators get to sign on... To sit behind a desk :ugh::ugh:

And lets be realistic about this, if you have some young shag flt lt at the end of his first tour, wife is pregnant and about to go on a single salary, with a mortgage to pay, what is the deskie going to do once the Flt lt first tourist explains to their flight commander they cant cope financially?

Yep, you have guessed it, find a suitable PA! :hmm:

[indie cent]

...and the Professional Aviator with his (f)ATPL in his back pocket and 4000 hours experience, will walk.

With a wry grin and taking no pvr pay cut as they go.

[Whenurhappy]

I, for one, after 26 years service across the world, dragging my dutiful wife and family with me, having done a variety of intrinsically interesting jobs outside of the RAF (indeed outside the UK MOD), picked up 1/2 dozen campaign medals (at the expense of my career), faced down guys with guns...I have had enough. I'm reasonably senior and have worked long hours in Main Building (twice) and see the 'big picture' but there is only so much I should be financially penalised for because of others' failings - whether it be the previous political administration financial management or the wanton greed of the financial services sector.

I then see grip-and-grin photos of 'desert dodgers' from my Branch promoted over me because they pursued cynical career choices that gave face time, but added little to the UK Defence output. The last few rounds the non-operational honours list filled me with a degree of disdain for some on those lists who have never worn DPMs in anger. Although non-aircrew, I enjoyed the collegiate environment in town which allowed me to discuss and espouse the virtues and future of air power amongst brevet colleagues as their equal; changes to SP will ensure that only aircrew will ever fill 'flying related' posts, distanciating much of the supporting personnel from air crew, and thus doing little to champion air power outside the brevet elite.

Where I currently serve is chuffingly expensive as an expat and I now learn that my LOA is going to be cut again, I am under a 2 year pay freeze (notwithstanding increments) and now I have to contribute a further substantial amount to see my son who has no option than to attend boarding school in England (the closest English language school is in another country!). I have to travel, often for weeks at a time, and I am forced to wash my uniform in the hotel bath and hang it out to dry. GBP 10 a day was an insult to cover 'incidentals' when travelling; GBP5 was derisory and now I have to fund doing UK business out of our own pocket -along with any 'representational duties' that I undertake, with the practical withdrawal of REA. Additionally we are in a ****ty hiring which no way compares with what I would be entitled to on a station - yet I pay the same amount as if I was at, say High Wycombe.

I will await the signal on 1 Mar to see whether I fall into one of the redundancy fields and act accordingly. Possibly my post here will be cut as part of the Cochrane review? Who knows? Whether I volunteer for redundancy or PVR (in old money) it will be a very, very sad day for me. I have been proud to serve in the Royal Air Force, and have done so for my adult working life. Often I put that service ahead of my family. No more; I feel let down, indeed betrayed. The whole Service has. It is not the fault of the 'Airships' (a term not used in town!); responsibility falls at the feet of a political metropolitan elite (of all politcal persuasions) that see Defence as quaintly anachronistic and a vestige of old-fashioned values that are cringingly out of tune with modern Britain.

[gijoe]

I would wager that there are many harbouring the same views as the last poster who wrote a well and reasoned post. There is a big difference between this and the 'I am in Cyprus and I have had my LOA cut - :{' gang.

I think this country is not going to be happy when it gets the forces that the politicians deserve.

G:ok:

[Jambo Jet]

In this world of equal opportunities it seems unfair to me that a person might be expected to take upto a 25% paycut for being selected to undertake a ground tour (due to service needs), whereas a similarly qualified individual in a flying related tour continues to receive the full whack.

Would be interesting if that individual on the ground tour was then offered PA approaching his exit point only to transfer across several levels lower than he would if being paid SP. Scant reward I'm sure.

Just more push factors to the civvy world, I'm sure you all agree.

[Grimweasel]

Don't leave! This is what they want! It's manning reductions by stealth - ie make it bad, then make it worse and then hope they leave of their own accord! Then we don't pay redundancy for them!

All this cr@p about equivalent civilian commuting of 9 Miles is expected yada yah! What a complete load of tosh - we are supposedly compensated for the fact that we are forced to move home and family every 18months to 2 years. Civvies get to stay put for as long as they have a job. The 10% cut in home to duty etc would be palatable had we not already had a cut of 25% last year -so a cut of 35% within 12 months.

Then, I try to move into the mess only to find there are no rooms, so they move me into SSSA. I then duly move out and all of a sudden my £12.47 a day for food and incidentals is removed totally and I'm now expected to eat in the mess due to my room being within 3 miles of camp? If they try and put me onto the ration roll as well (ie pay food from wage packet) the effect is a £600 cut per month!! Investors in People my arse!!

One of the mitigating factors for people that have 'career plateaued' is to ensure that the fringe benefits are sufficient to suitably motivate personnel. The fact that may will have an enforced promotion and wage increase ban along with a cut in those fringe benefits (for doing my bloody job!) is, in my opinion, indefensible!

The previous comment about us all paying for the stupidity of previous governments and risk taking and greed on the part of banks etc rings very true. Yet these people continue to gamble away OUR money as if nothing has changed. Disgrace.

The sad fact is that they have broken the Western capitalism model and I for one will be staying in the RAF to wring them dry of every benefit possible - safe in the knowledge that we will be on the streets within a year controlling mass riots and a break down in civil order caused by the impending entire collapse of the financial system. Don't quite discount another deeper recession caused by Fed and BoE meddling - we are doomed. Really...

[Party Animal]

Whenurhappy,

Always a pleasure to read your well balanced and intelligent postings, except in this case, it is a post that none of us would want to see. Of course you're right and it will be interesting to see how many individuals choose not to volunteer for overseas jobs, when they do the maths and realise that wife giving up job, selling the UK car at a big loss, being out of pocket for hugely increased overseas costs like car insurance etc. is not counterbalanced by the minimal LOA they will receive in return. Certainly not the great package that it used to be and even without the newly announced cuts, it was becoming tight after the last 3 years worth of cuts that sneaked in via stealth.

Of course you never mentioned the 18 year old kids no longer accounted for and depending on the age of your own children, the babysitting allowance being cut will mean excessive personal cost if you are expected to perform representational duties. From my own experience, I was once in a post that required me to do this 2-3 nights per week.

Very best of luck to you regardless...

[fin1012]

I travel a lot, but have never claimed for the odd sandwich, cup of coffee etc, figuring I would probably have bought them anyway. From now on, (or at least until I am hopefully made redundant in March after 29 years loyal and selfless service) I have resolved to claim every legitimate penny going. Military covenant, don't make me laugh.

[jayc530]

If the MoD is really that desperate to make savings how on earth can anyone still justify Air rank officers retiring on full pay.

[Diablo Rouge]

I put in a claim this week for a service duty journey. I undertook the journey in my own car as no service transport was available. I made a point of refuelling often at the key stages of the overall journey. I actually spent £230 in fuel and received £170 towards that fuel in motor mileage allowance. This is clearly due to the the spiraling cost of fuel and the lowering; and due to get worse, renumeration from the service.

Next time; and there will be a next time, if MT cannot provide a vehicle I will cancel the task. The tasking I do may well be high profile and important to OOA but I refuse to pay for the costs involved. I am quite sure that the spin placed on the allowances package included a statement that renumeration of duty fees was essential. The caveate of using your own car to incur 'convenience contribution' is something that could well bite them in the arse the way fuel costs are going. My peers are independently voicing a similar opinion with regard to service travel.

[BEagle]

...how on earth can anyone still justify Air rank officers retiring on full pay...They don't. That's an utter myth.

[fin1012]

DB, Already happened to me this week. No MT available for a trip next week and I have refused to use my own vehicle. I explained that if the trip was that important then I would need a hire car - their call. Hire car duly hired and fuel card to be issued. So, instead of paying me less than the the actual cost of fuel and getting free use of my car, it cost at least £40 for the hire car and the full cost of the fuel. I would have been happy to use my own vehicle if my actual costs were to be reimbursed, no more, no less. Time the system learned that loyalty is a 2 way street - and yes I do feel bad writing this because, even 1 yr ago, it would have been unthinkable.

[Grimweasel]

Actually you'd still be wrong to accept the FULL costs of your travel and this has only just dawned on me recently, due to the lost opportunity cost of money.

I would demand a small premium to take into account the lost opportunity cost of money that I could have gained greater utility with on that day.
It's almost as if they are taking an interest free loan from people and with inflation expected to exceed 5% this year, I will be ensuring that MT provides the car!

[SL Hardly-Worthitt]

A couple of us ‘debating’ the PVR v Redundancy issue….and we’re requesting some clarification/admin expertise if available. Been re-reading 2010 DIN01-187 (Regular Armed Forces Redundancy Programme) and, if possible, would like to know if it can be clearly established that yesterday’s announcement of the total loss of SP when you PVR is NOT applicable to those who are selected for redundancy (either as volunteers or as non-applicants) and that application for redundancy does not equal, or can be considered as, an application for PVR.

I’m not able to post a link to the DIN here, however it does contain the following:

8. g. Notice Period. Successful applicants for redundancy will be entitled to 6 months notice to leave. Non-applicants who are selected for redundancy will be entitled to 12 months notice to leave. The notice period will begin from the notification date unless deferred in accordance with paragraph 8(c)(1) or (2). All personnel who have been selected for redundancy may apply to leave at any time during their period of notice, subject to Service agreement (and deployment commitments – see paragraph 8(c)(1) and (2)).


and



9. Specialist Pay. Both applicants and non-applicants for redundancy who are in receipt of specialist pay at the point of notification of redundancy will have their specialist pay assessed in accordance with the policy for handling personnel who elect to leave the Service at a recognised exit point.


This paragraph is the one that concerns. What does “…will have their specialist pay assessed in accordance with the policy for handling personnel who elect to leave the Service at a recognised exit point.” …actually mean?

Hopefully somebody in the know can confirm that this is not something to concern those that may wish to apply for redundancy (or get notified anyway without applying!) that they do not then lose their SP for the 6 (or 12) months of their notice period.

Thanks in advance.

H-W

[Willard Whyte]

They don't. That's an utter myth.

Rather than contradict, why not inform?

Pray, on what financial terms do they retire?

[adminblunty]

Whenurhappy,
Good post, you've hit the nail firmly on the head and I agree with what you've said.

When you compare the allowances package to that in the FCO the difference is stark. It's clear to me as a professionally HR specialist that the MOD is doing its very best to get rid of personnel on the cheap.

Anyone who thinks the airline industry/airline recruitment is going to get better anytime soon is deluded. Just look at the economies of the PIGS, UK inflation, UK pay restriant, years of stagflation ahead, a trillion pounds of personal debt in the UK, the spiralling cost of fuel therefore flights/holidays, UK GDP growth figures, the public sector borrowing requirement etc. So I don't think I or many others will be going on holiday overseas soon, so if we aren't flying will you... Oh and don't believe BALPA, they do have an agenda after all.

You can blame the bankers totally, we are to blame as well, we became obessed by having it all now whether we could afford it or not, the buy now pay later generation, except we've done the buying and now we are paying.

I'm glad I've left and joined above-mentioned dept, however I'm not proud of my new colleagues attitude and disdain for the military. When the military get involved it's an indication the diplomats have failed.

Adminblunty

[adminblunty]

Willard,
MRAF retired on full pay, however the rank of MRAF was discontinued some years ago and the number alive is very small. An ACM, AM, AVM Air Cdre etc who retires leaves with a pension. All the details will be the relevant Joint Service Publication on Pensions, however I don't have a link to it.

Adminblunty

[Aeronut]

We bemoan the lack of representation and inability to strike but the way we are being hit means a work to rule is sadly now sweeping across the service.
Loyalty in return for loyalty.

[Scuttled]

Adminblunty is totally correct. It's amazing how deep rooted this incorrect notion that all air officers retire on full pay is. Most people accept it as an absolute truth and will strongly disagree when you tell them it isn't the case.

It comes up on here regularly.

[Mr C Hinecap]

I undertook the journey in my own car as no service transport was available.

Why none available? Did you give them enough notice for the journey? They could have and should have hired for you if proper notice was given.

So, instead of paying me less than the the actual cost of fuel and getting free use of my car, it cost at least £40 for the hire car and the full cost of the fuel.

So they provided you with what you need to do your job, yet you are unhappy? I fail to see your point about actual costs - nobody expected you to use your own car.

[Tilt&Gain]

H-W

You are correct. The Briefing Note to be issued on 1 Feb will explain all, but if you opt for or are selected for redundancy your SP is not affected during your 'waiting period'. You will continue to be paid at your current rate up until the day you leave. In effect, your redundancy date will become a 'normal' exit date.

T&G

[Biggus]

DR,

I suggest you buy yourself a new car, as your current one (appears) to be rubbish.

You say you got £170 back in claims for petrol, but it cost you £230.

Now lets look at that in more detail:

ASSUMPTION 1. Costs refunded at 25p/mile (which I believe is the current figure).

Therefore, £170 divided by 25p = 680 miles driven.

ASSUMPTION 2. Fuel cost £1.30/litre.

£230 divided by £1.30 = approx 177L = approx. 38.9 gallons.


Therefore your car has a fuel consumption of 680 divided by 38.9 = 17.4 miles per gallon - is it a Rolls Royce?


Of course my assumptions may be incorrect, feel free to point out any errors. A higher fuel price will make some difference, but not a lot.

Possibly you also finished your journey with less than dry tanks?


A few years ago the AA was quoting about 40p per mile to cover ALL the costs of running a car, fuel, MOT, servicing, insurance, etc, but for most people 25p per mile covers the cost of fuel.

[minigundiplomat]

A few years ago the AA was quoting about 40p per mile to cover ALL the costs of running a car, fuel, MOT, servicing, insurance, etc, but for most people 25p per mile covers the cost of fuel.


A few years ago, fuel was 80p a litre. It's now £1.30 odd.

Chinecap - You are so indoctrinated. I hope you can swim well, as you'll be the last one to let go of the deck rail as the RAF slips below the surface. You do realise that everything they told you at IOT isn't true?

[Pontius Navigator]

The reduction in allowances will inevitably mean an increase in out of pocket expenses. The extra expenditure wholly connected with your business journey may be tax deductible.

The obvious one is the mileage allowance although you would be limited to the additional 15p per mile unrefunded by the MOD, however where the MOD refunds less than the mileage you necessarily travelled then you can claim that additional mileage at 40p/mile. You may have detoured for a meal or road works etc.

With the reduced subsistence allowance you may have to pay more than the allowance. For instance you might be in an hotel with little choice of dining options, you could therefore try and submit that expense to HMRC too.

The things covered by the old IE allowance would not be claimable.

If, however, you had an extended detachment and no access to you home laundry you could try and claim for the necessary additional laundry expenses.

Provided you don't try and rip the a2se out of the system it will probably be paid unchallenged, but do have receipts and a proper record - same as JPA really.

[Pontius Navigator]

MGD, quite true. I believe there is even a clause in QRs that entitles you to claim PCR rate on the unit. For instance if you are on a remote site and required to go to supply or a meeting then you are entitled to transport. If MT can't provide and your boss won't let you use his wheels then how would you get there?

I used to try and MT would steal wheels from the individual furthest down the food chain, usually the CRO. :)

[teeteringhead]

Air Officers pensions:

All the details will be the relevant Joint Service Publication on Pensions, however I don't have a link to it. ... can't find the link either, but ISTR it's 50% - which is about what most leavers-at-55 would get.

Not in a JSP, but in the Senior Salaries Advisory Board Report - the AFPRB equivalent for the reeely top brass. Should be Googlable, but I can't be @rsed, as I won't be getting an Air Officers' pension!! :{

[LFFC]

Senior Officers' Retired Pay (http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/F368280A-2C3D-4DDC-A5BD-45C48847B6C8/0/SeniorOfficersPensionBenefits2010.pdf)

[Biggus]

If you are getting 25p a mile as an allowance, this is the equivalent of:

23.64 miles per gallon at £1.30 for fuel, or

25.46 miles per gallon at £1.40 for fuel.

So, if you are paying £1.40 for fuel, and your vehicle is achieving 26 miles per gallon or more, you are actually making a profit - IN TERMS OF FUEL COSTS ONLY!!


Minigun - I am not defending the system, or disagreeing with your comment. I just find it hard to work out how Diablo came up with his figures.....

[minigundiplomat]

Minigun - I am not defending the system, or disagreeing with your comment. I just find it hard to work out how Diablo came up with his figures.....


Quite accept that. I don't either, but just pointed out that fuel costs had risen spectacularly over the past few years.

[SL Hardly-Worthitt]

T&G,
VMT!:ok:
H-W

[Union Jack]

MRAF retired on full pay, however the rank of MRAF was discontinued some years ago and the number alive is very small. An ACM, AM, AVM Air Cdre etc who retires leaves with a pension. All the details will be the relevant Joint Service Publication on Pensions, however I don't have a link to it.

AB - Close, but worth pointing out that five star officers of all Services promoted prior to 1 Apr 80 were "eligible for either half pay or active list retired pay", a specially created description and rate consistent with the fact that they are deemed not to retire. Those promoted from 1 Apr 80 onwards were "eligible, during periods for which he does not receive full pay, active list retired pay", full pay applying of course primarily to CDSs until such promotion on appointment as CDS ceased in 1996. Needless to say, the foregoing does not apply to members of the Royal Family holding five star ranks, such as HRH The Duke of Edinburgh and HRH The Duke of Kent.

So, for the avoidance of doubt:

No officer of Flag, General, or Air rank retires, or has retired within living memory, on full pay:ok:

Jack

[Tankertrashnav]

As a disinterested bystander (it's over 30 years since I had a penny for petrol off anyone) I'd still like to comment.

By far the biggest cost in driving a car, other than fuel, is depreciation. Every mile you drive knocks a little bit off its resale value. If all that MOD is compensating you for is the cost of the petrol then they are getting a bargain, and you are doing the taxpayer a favour.

For which thank you very much, by the way!

[Uncle Ginsters]

...and don't forget your insurance. If you drive your personal car on duty without business travel in your policy then you may not be covered...where's the button for Car Insurance on JPA???

[Pontius Navigator]

...and don't forget your insurance. If you drive your personal car on duty without business travel in your policy then you may not be covered...where's the button for Car Insurance on JPA???

And that includes driving to a detached duty station on a Monday and home on the Friday where PCR is claimed.

[dallas]

Needless to say, the foregoing does not apply to members of the Royal Family holding five star ranks, such as HRH The Duke of Edinburgh and HRH The Duke of Kent.
Perhaps a bone Q: do their HRH's get paid at the rate for their stars or are they all honorary unpaid ranks?

[Mr C Hinecap]

You do realise that everything they told you at IOT isn't true?

Given I've been OC MT in more than one country both on and off ops, I was hoping to ascertain what, if anything, went wrong with 'the system' for the posters concerned. I was then hoping to perhaps advise them on how to get it to work properly next time.
I don't know how you view your self and your professional field, but I like to do the right thing, rather than just doing things right. It tends to baffle some, but helps the rest in some small way.

[Diablo Rouge]

The MT problem is due to late notice tasking, a factor that seems prevalent these days. Result is "When do you need it" & "Now", which is nobodys fault at unit level. Also too many small saloons being driven from the Mess to HQ by SOff (Senior Officers) when a need for external transport exists. They (SOff) should be using electric golf buggies like to US Forces do.

In fairness, your answer did appear a bit bone at the time.

[Mr C Hinecap]

In fairness, your answer did appear a bit bone at the time.

In fairness, I've had most Branches believe my professional remit to be very bone for most of my career. I'll do my very best to ask better questions in future - now if I may return to my corner?

[fin1012]

Mr C H
Not unhappy as such, just thinking that if the mileage allowance was a little nearer the actual cost, I would use my own car and save the cost of a hire car. That said, I would never think of doing 700 miles in my own car for service business - at 15000 miles between services which cost £300 that would be £15 in costs on top of fuel, not to mention depreciation.

[Pontius Navigator]

Remember the PCR is a convenience reimbursement should you wish to use your own car rather than use public transport including buses, taxis and trains. If for reasons of convenience you chose to use your own car travelling from home rather than travelling in to you unit then they graciously pay you the public transport equivalent (well they did).

Take a hypothetical course starting Monday morning (why Monday?) and you need to travel on Sunday. You would be expected to travel by train on Sunday and return when the course ends. During the course you would of course be on-base and unable to go in to towm to the pub or wherever. Naturally you will have travelled by car - your choice!

The higher MMA or ODR was when you were required to undertake an official journey and for one reason or another public transport or service transport was not available. That is the allowance which will be stopped. The implication is that transport will always be provided and it is your choice whether to use it or not.

Occasionally public transport will not be available; the answer is clear - DON'T use your own car - cancel the trip.

[TheWizard]

Take a hypothetical course starting Monday morning (why Monday?) and you need to travel on Sunday. You would be expected to travel by train on Sunday and return when the course ends. During the course you would of course be on-base and unable to go in to towm to the pub or wherever. Naturally you will have travelled by car - your choice!

The higher MMA or ODR was when you were required to undertake an official journey and for one reason or another public transport or service transport was not available. That is the allowance which will be stopped. The implication is that transport will always be provided and it is your choice whether to use it or not.

Occasionally public transport will not be available; the answer is clear - DON'T use your own car - cancel the trip.

If only the real world was so simple :rolleyes:
Public transport? You are having a laugh if you think you can get to half the isolated bases with the amount of kit you need these days on a bus (if there is even one that goes remotely near)
Cancel the trip- easier said than done if you are not at exec level or above.

[Jambo Jet]

Given I've been OC MT in more than one country both on and off ops, I was hoping to ascertain what, if anything, went wrong with 'the system' for the posters concerned.

Crickey! How come a bus spotter manages to find time to post in excess of 900 times on a pilot's forum? What's wrong with www.pbsrune.co.uk?

[Scuttled]

Just for fun, I'll do the bite for Mr C Hinecap.........

Military Aircrew A forum for the professionals who fly the non-civilian hardware, and the backroom boys and girls without whom nothing would leave the ground. Army, Navy and Airforces of the World, all equally welcome here.

....... and no I'm not a fellow MTO, just bored.

[FFP]

Back to the business in hand......

Happy with the cuts and in particular, I'm interested in the LOA change. So everyone will fall into 3 brackets, all based on a Cpl's LOA. The other 2 brackets will be paid at 1.1 and 1.2 times the Cpl rate (so a Flt Lt will get the 1.1 times)

Now looking at the Cpl's rate, it's actually the same as (even a few pence higher) than the Flt Lt rate. So, happy with that, esp as I'll get 1.1 times it in the future (2012 or whenever the phase in is complete)

Now, the question is, since LOA is being "revised" to take into account changes in lifestyle blah de blah de blah, how much is the Cpl's rate going to change by from it's current level ? Any ideas or answers been heard from the Admin world ?

For what it's worth, I'm glad I'm going onto Cpl LOA. Maybe I can afford the fast car's and personalised number plates they all have........

(And is the price difference between Red sauce and Brown sauce being take into account ? :E )

[WPH]

FFP,

You're joking, right?!

Having seen some estimates for LOA in the US, it's not good news for anybody except Pilot and Flying Officers. A Flt Lt will lose roughly 150 pounds a month. For SNCOs and Senior Officers the decrease is significant, roughly 450 pounds for a WO for example.

We can all debate whether the current rates are excessive and also debate why there has been such a difference between ranks in the past. The fact is that most people live to their means and may have taken on extra financial commitments based on their expected income.

As I've said on another thread, I'm sure the reduction in LOA will receive little sympathy on here however, such a significant overnight cut to the monthly income of many personnel is not something that we should make light of (assuming some of us still care about those that we command and their families?).

WPH

[Pontius Navigator]

If you read Mr Hinecap's posts more are relevant than some drivel posted here. Without any MT the aircraft would not move at all. Any flight starts and finishes with MT, even those in muddy fields.

As for public transport, I agree that it is a joke. To move from my last unit to my nearby co-unit 30 miles away would be a day's journey by rail or bus and need a Call-Connect bus at each end.

What the system actually does is relies on the individual's wilingness to use his own car for his own convenience.

I recall one occasion, which I would doubt would happen now, when I requested a rail warrant from out local station 10 miles away. Mrs PN was travelling with me at my expense. We were just about to leave, intending to leave our car at the station, when a Ford Galaxy turned up at our home some 6 miles from the unit, and whisked us both to the station. He was there waiting for us when we returned that evening. The whole thing had been organised through handbrake house.

[FFP]

It's not an overnight cut though WPH. There's a few changes in May 11 and then more in 2012 to bring it to the revised levels.

All valid arguments pointed out by you. The cuts are what they are. 150 GBP could be a lot worse (A 30 to 50 % slashing was the rumour I'd heard pre announcement.....)

As long as my AFPS 75 pension isn't screwed with anymore.....:\

[Party Animal]

FFP

I think you will find all LOA changes come into place on 1 May. If you take the USA as an example, the only 2 ranks that do not lose money are Fg Off and SAC - if they have no kids. Reductions on the whole are in the order of 30 - 50% which is a big hit when the whole reason for being given LOA hasn't changed.

[FFP]

Reductions on the whole are in the order of 30 - 50%

Are you talking about HTD, LOSLOA and LOA combined or just LOA ? Because I can't see how the LOA is dropping 30 - 50 % for everyone (Wg Cdr and WO maybe)

As a Flt Lt, a 150 GBP drop is 15% for me. I guess the crux of my question is where is this 30 to 50 % coming from for LOA reductions ?

[Party Animal]

Not sure about HTD but (for the USA) from 1 May:

LOSLOA -

AVM from £46.55 to £18.26
Wg Cdr from £43.20 to £18.26
Flt Lt from £37.84 to £17.77
FS from £41.01 to £17.77
Cpl from £38.25 to £17.28

LOA (2 kids examples)

AVM from £51.13 to £24.44
Wg Cdr from £43.07 to £24.44
Flt Lt from £29.27 to £22.98
FS from £39.22 to £22.98
Cpl from £29.83 to £21 54

Leave you to do the maths...

[general all rounder]

The overall reduction in allowances equates to an average reduction of approx £ 1,500 per person per annum.

[gijoe]

...to work somewhere where, in most cases, the cost of living will be cheaper than that in Blighty whilst the quality of life will be higher.

Don't take this as me thinking it is right because there are all of the other factors (Mrs not working, loss of value of car etc) but this has been coming for a long time.

It was good whilst it lasted.

G:ok:

[baffman]

The overall reduction in allowances equates to an average reduction of approx £ 1,500 per person per annum.The Telegraph estimate was "a £1,400 cut in income for every soldier, sailor and airman", but your figure is in the same ball-park. Can you quote a source?

A possible complication to such calculations is how much of the reduction to attribute to members of the reserve forces.

[FFP]

Party Animal,

That's what I was looking for. I've had LOSLOA in the past few months and as a Flt Lt it was never that high, maybe I was on a married rate Vs single rate or something.

Either way, those amounts are rudely obscene as pre cut levels. Even $17 GBP is a lot IMO.

LOA cut will be hard for those to swallow on the higher amounts, but it's probably down to a fairer level. What I would say is that you need to leave people there for 3 years (which I'm sure is the norm) to recoup those costs.

Time to restructure the budget a little.....;)

[teeteringhead]

I think the Telegraph's and others' figures of £1400-1500 are simplistically derived - amount cut divided by total number of bodies.

Target is to save £216M in year 1, which is about £1450 from about 150 000 regulars...... and the final target is £300M...:{

Normally there are winners and losers - mostly losers this time around methinks ....:(

[Whenurhappy]

I've been in my current post for about 5 months; before that I was on another overseas post (Volsep) for 6 months; the gestation for both these postings (linked) goes back almost 2 years. As you may have read earlier, we (me and the family) did the sums (eg loss of second income), considered the options re schooling and then the lifestyle aspects. However, the Service need was also a great factor - 'WP - you'd be the ideal person for that job - we're looking for your breadth and depth of experience in your niche field, would enhance your profile, etc etc...'

Clearly I agreed on the COA but now the financial goal-posts have substantially changed early on in the tour and the substantially reduced LOA in no way meets the additional costs of living in a very, very expensive part of the world; additionally I have subsidised a lot of representational events ouit of my own pocket, as REA is effectively unavailable. In sum, we exercised 'due dilligence' when we were offered the posts and now the rules have changed. In any other environment, one could appeal - or decide to leave forthwith. We are denied that avenue - or should we redress what is clearly a grievance?

Thoughts...

[gijoe]

When,

Yours is a very interesting case and my suggestion is that if it is financially that painful for you to remain in post then it may be time to have a grown up and sensible chat with your one-up leader - I hate the line manager thing!

Grown up and sensible is important - not a 'now I can't get my tax free car, as many fags and less Warsteiner type boll*aux' whinge about LOA being cut.

Looking at it, you were selected for a post, did your sums and made a decision...but things have changed and your circumstances demand a review.

OODA ;)

The desk offficers of all 3 services obviously read the same script when it comes to posting people :ok:

It would be very interesting to hear the systems reply - good luck!

G:ok:

[Al R]

MoD 'breaches Military Covenant' with £250 million allowance cuts - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/8272119/MoD-breaches-Military-Covenant-with-250-million-allowance-cuts.html)


Defence ministers have been accused of the breaching the Military Covenant and double standards after they axed Service allowances that amounted to a £1,400 cut in income for every soldier, sailor and airman.

Having just read that, and the Nimrod scrapping debacle, I'm not sure if WhenUR has grounds for redress, but almost certainly grounds for considering with a fair degree of accuracy that we are 'defended' by self serving careerists, politicians and incompetent hypocrites who you wouldn't trust as far as you could throw 'em.

[Biggus]

If the average loss per soldier, sailor and airman, is £1,400 then:


For every individual who loses CEA (for 1 child), an allowance that many on pprune have been quick to attack, with only a small minority defending, then about 9 others on average don't lose anything!

It would appear that for every senior officer and SNCO in the USA having their LOA reduced another 3 or 4 others on average lose nothing.


Indeed, rather than everyone losing £1,400 per year, there are some very big losers, and some (the majority) who lose a small amount of money...

I'm not saying that this is right or wrong, fair or unfair, just trying to point out that the £1,400 figure should be taken with a very large pinch of salt....

[Nomorefreetime]

Anyone want to tell us what LOA is exactly for.

I'm not in the UK at the mo to look it up, but IIRC it is for 17 key points. The cost of feeding your self is not in the 17. I was once told what it was for and it came as a surprise (for Cyprus anyway).

[Scuttled]

Gentlemen.

Big round numbers, but total allowances bill £880 million.
CEA (left alone to all intents and purposes) £280 million.
Cuts of 250 from remaining 600 million = a reduction of over 41%.

Easy to see that most of us are even worse off than we thought. In my chain of command, overseas, only the single SACs win on loa...... By 25p a day.

It is not just the senior people, who can maybe afford it, being hit by this. I'm okay, I can cover it. You tell a sgt with a couple of kids who made an informed financial decision to take a job that he is now over £300 net out of pocket per month, or cpl with 3 kids £250 per month, that he must just get on with it. These are big sums to our lesser paid blokes and we are meant to look after them.

But we can't do a thing. These 'allowances' aren't an extravagance, they are a necessity. Call the money what you will, this is another pay cut.

Yours in hopeless emasculation,

Scuttled (appropriate name huh?)

[Biggus]

Best everyone overseas puts in a gen app for an early return to the UK then, on the grounds of financial hardship. The military are (or at least were) interested if its people are in financial difficulties, as in theory it makes them more of a security risk...



Such an approach may, coupled with the (likely) unwillingness of anyone else to take up the posts, highlight the issue more than posting on pprune will.

[Scuttled]

Sadly, raising ones head above the parapet probably just opens you up for the incoming redundancy rounds about to be fired.

It's a bit like those emails saying boycott Esso for 12 months to force a petrol price cut. Nice idea, never happen. The several hundred personnel in the States, for example, all demanding to be sent home - with the press impact, cost of moves etc etc would make a great point and show of force. It'd be hugely embarrassing for HMG too......is it defiance? Mutineering? Okay, a bit ott, but I'm sure anyone doing it would be on a list to walk in the next couple of years.

The Septics I work and socialize with are aghast at the treatment of our people and our handling of the financial situation in the mod in general.

[Pontius Navigator]

And you would really turn down a tour in the States or somewhere sunny?

[Squirrel 41]

PN,

Nail, head, bang.

There's no problem selling this as the number of applicants for the "gucci" jobs abroad will always exceed the number of slots, even if the allowances are cut. Similarly, you could probably bin flying pay for new applicants tomorrow and still have far more volunteers than you could ever need - indeed, look at what happened when FP was no longer paid for training.

Consequently, this will be deemed a successful saving, and is probably a whole lot less damaging than some other ones that could have been considered. Salami slicing it may be, and certainly unpleasant for those on the receiving end, but we got a lot of sausage to save.

S41

[Biggus]

PN,

I turned down a job in New Zealand about 6 months ago......









So, the answer to your question is yes!

[Pontius Navigator]

Biggus, you may have turned that job down 6 months ago but I am sure your reason was not connected with allowances.

[Willard Whyte]

...and would you turn it down if offered it today?

[Scuttled]

PN

Hear you loud and clear. You're probably right for 90% of cases.

But the facts are I lost about 20K on two cars moving here and then obviously had to buy more. I didn't replace anybody in post, so no cheap second hand gear, and was given $150 dollars to buy all the electrical appliances we need here. Look around your house and tot it all up. It's thousands...

My wife was in a good job, not here she isn't,
"Gee I love your accent! Why are you here hunny?"
"My husband is an exchange officer on a 3 year tour."
"Oh, so it's temporary employment you want then, not a career. Tried shop work?"

The loa was factored into our income to see if we could afford this. Then they cut it. By quite a lot, overnight.

It's just wrong. I guess we're an easy, non striking target. To reiterate, I can cope; I'll be watching my boys and girls carefully to see if they can.

[Biggus]

Willard,


a) The job no longer exists.


b) I would still turn it down if it did and I were offered it.

[Pontius Navigator]

Scuttled/Biggus and similar, yes the car issue is a biggie for that sort of posting but Miss PN1 and hubby took their wheels to Cyprus, sold one and brought one home. They didn't buy overseas at all.

White goods were bought and then sold-on when they returned. Selling stuff on is not unusual and often done on exchange postings.

[Easy Street]

additionally I have subsidised a lot of representational events ouit of my own pocket, as REA is effectively unavailable.Please stop - this way a slippery slope lies!! We are all indispensable in our own minds; the reality is somewhat different and you should not be spending your own money on the Government's business. I judge that if the "company" is not willing to pay for me to attend meetings or conferences then my presence is not actually required; this approach has worked for me so far without attracting any trouble - and has probably saved me from many pointless engagements!

[WPH]

At the risk of becoming boring....

I think the point Scuttled and others are making is that the rules have been changed overnight (or will do on 1 May), coupled with the recent announcement of a pay freeze, HTD changes, little promotion etc etc. A lot has changed in the 2 yrs I've been overseas.

I agree that the new rates of LOA are still good and people will still be attracted to overseas postings but that is not the point that is being made. It would have been fairer to keep those already overseas on the same LOA and introduce the changes to newcomers however, I accept this proposal would create a few administrative headaches!

[Whenurhappy]

PN, I think you miss Scuttled's point. If you are not going to a garrison or HQ posting abroad, you can't always get stuff second-hand on the economy from departing service personnel. Laughably, our hiring, which I accept is many, many, many miles from any UK unit, is meant to be 'furnished' to a high standard.

I don't think so. Fridge? No. Floor coverings? No. Wardrobes? No. Washing machine? No. Drier? No. Side lamps/table lamps/bedside lamps? No. Curtains? Not ones you'd want to be seen dead with. Toilet brushes? No. Matching dining chairs? No. Range hood? No. Boiler serviced in the last 10 years? No. Chimney swept in the last 5 years? No. Sitting room seating for more than 3 people? No.

We were limited to bring out personal effects (approx 13 sq m) which precluded bringing any furiture or kitchen stuff. DA certainly doesn't cover this delta. We have managed to get a nice sofa bed second hand, and a wireless router from a passing American, and trips to Ikea in a neighbouring country have made the house look, well, a bit like an Ikea show-room. I have raised many concerns with our parenting body. The standard response is 'Budgets, Sir'. We are embarrased to entertain at home because of the general condition of the fabric of the property. Add that to the reducing LOA, increased SCV costs, no BFPO, no BFBS (yeah!), no local schooling,...well, I don't want to sound like I am complaining!

It is certainly a far cry from earlier overseas tours that I have done. Many of these changes have taken place very recently, too.

[Pontius Navigator]

Whenurhappy, what u say about a garrison is one thing but the flat swap is not confined to garrisons or even the military.

I had in mind some medics, there were 3 who were in particular SO1 billets, one in USA, one in Alvestoke and one elsewhere in UK. They always used the same flat in USA as their predessor.

If you read Craig Murray's book on Uzbekistan the same applied to the diplomatic mission.

You are quite right that the basic stuff provided is just that. And I take the other point that changing LOA rules during the tour is not good but remember LOA was always variable and this is not the first time it has taken a swinging hit. IIRC it applied in the 80s too especially in Germany.

[Whenurhappy]

PN, I am very familiar with taking over predecessor's accommodation, car, furniture, pets etc; however in this case it did not happen. My predecessor was without kids and clearly wasn't concerned about living in a hovel - and problems identified many months in advance of our move were simply not addressed by the parenting body - either because the couldn't care less or that its was a 'budgetary problem' (= couldn't care less).

The FCO are usually much more 'lean-forward' on providing decent accommodation, however the bust-up between the FCO and MOD over funding domestic accommodation several years ago left no one as the winner - especially DAs and their (few) staff.