Military Personnel Not as Fexible as MOD Civil Servants

[tramps]

Waiting in anticipation for our military chiefs to wade in and publicly rebuke her, waiting for a response from the PM on the matter.........waiting:E

[Red Line Entry]

Jimlad has it spot on so can we park the outrage bus in its garage for this one? The CS are taking a massive hit which will affect our operational output but while they are the politicians' convenient bogey-men I can't see any repreive.

As for PUS, notwithstanding the ad hominem attacks from the adonis that is sidewayspeak, she's doing a damn sight better job than Bill Jeffrey ever did.

[tucumseh]

Airborne Artist

If you asked a CS to do the same they'd have had the union involved in seconds.

CS unions are cack all use and their permanent staffs, many funded by MoD, should be sent back to work.

As I've said elsewhere, CS retention in the current climate should be based on the proven (or otherwise) ability to meet the formal Grade Descriptions.

As that would deplete the (MoD) CS of about 80% or more, I'd temper that by saying less incompetent staffs should be given, say, 2 years to attain and demonstrate basic competencies which they are presently not required to attain. If they fail, chop them to the grade they are competent at. For donkeys years the promotion system was such that you were initially paid less upon promotion anyway, so that is not a great jump.

And before the Services say anything, the above Grade Descriptions require CSs to carry out what are now Service jobs, like Requirements Management, MILSM and some others that were traditionally jobs one did before being promoted into MoD(PE). That is, most Service RqMs and MILSMs are at least 3 ranks above that necessary for the job. So, the same principle applies to most uniforms you see in the likes of AbbeyWood.

Or, of course, Bernard Gray could put his money where his mouth is and privatise the lot! His report for the last Government repeated many good points. But as he hasn't done anything, one wonders if he truly understands the issues or was just plagiarising previous work! But, to be fair, the usual Star Chamber suspects have been gloating about seeing him off, so perhaps he lacks top level support from politicians who understand even less.

[2Planks]

From The Telegraph:

Mrs Brennan admitted that Armed Forces personnel and civil servants are being treated differently as jobs are cut.
“That is an absolute distinction between the two schemes and is part of an approach that the civil service takes civil service-wide, that we don’t go to compulsory redundancy until we’ve done the voluntary exits first.”
She suggested that, unlike service personnel, civil servants are harder to sack because they have “flexible skills”.
She told the committee: “It is also partly because if you look at the Armed Forces, you have people who have specific ranks and trades.
“A very large number of the civil service have flexible skills that enable them to work in a variety of places.

Fulll Article No civil servant cuts at cash-strapped MoD - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/8911359/No-civil-servant-cuts-at-cash-strapped-MoD.html)

I will keep my comments short: appalled

[Gulfstreamaviator]

The PEN is mightier then the SWORD.

As mentioned above NO COMMENT, but what did you actually expect from jobs worth desk jockies.

glf

[tucumseh]

As a Civil Servant, I'd like to confirm this is balls.

Many years ago a CS was required to demonstrate to a promotion board that he/she was capable of carrying out any job at the next grade. There was a complementary rule in MoD(PE) that a Project Manager must be able to carry out every task/role on his project. For example, throughout most of my career these rules have been applied to me.

Today, one need only satisfy the board that, in time, one may become reasonably competent in the single post one is applying for.

As for "Assessment Centres", in practice they only assess your ability to do low level tasks that used to be pre-requisites before being promoted into MoD(PE).

That is a HUGE difference. Flexibility degraded from the day the new rule was introduced (in the 1990s).

So, the statement by Brennan is partly true of dinosaurs whose career was based on the old rules (which weren't always applied). They are in a small minority now. Brennan may be talking from personal experience but needs to get up to speed on extant "dumb down" policies.

Interestingly, and quite clearly illegally (in employment law), the old rules are still applied to those who were brought up under them. This double standard, whereby new staff don't have to attain the competencies of older staffs, is at the root of many of MoD's problems. Very often you have situations whereby senior staffs are sidelined because they lack experience and competence. Put another way, many project teams are "upside down", with key decisions taken by the most junior staffs.

[sidewayspeak]

Brennan is a very ugly, fat old woman. Errgh. :eek:

[Jimlad1]

Good lord, what an appalling badly researched article.

The reason that no MOD CS are being made compulsorily redundant is that they had over 15000 applicants for the 5000 people they needed to lose. They managed to hit their targets for the next 3 years with the first tranche.

What I think the good PUS is trying to say, and as always with the media, has spun out of context, is that when looking at manpower, there is an expectation that CS can be posted into a wider range of career posts because the training required is less technical, and the career plot is managed in a very different way.

In HM Forces, you may spend 20 years as a widget operator, doing courses that take 2-3 years to complete to get the basics right, and then being a deep specialist within a very narrow career field where everyone knows everyone. You may do posts outside this area, but generally you'll come back in to it, and thats where you experience lies. In the CS, its much more generalist in approach, and its easier to park a generalist project manager in one TLB, and move him into another TLB. A CS has very generalist skills, and is broadly appointable because they lack deep specialisations at most levels.

Its much more difficult to do that with a deeply specialised widget operator, where there may only be one location for them, or their entire trade group is being scrapped.In this instance, SNCOs in particular would suffer as although they'd have broader military skills, if the kit or equipment they have spent years using and maintaining is being taken out of service, and no replacement capability exists, then its quite a challenge to retrain experienced staff into a whole new system, and working out where to stick them that doesnt mess up existing career structures and promotion prospects, and doesnt mess with the manpower structure.

So yes, from a purely objective view - its slightly easier to relocate some generalist career civil servants because they don't have the same promotion system, or career structure. Similarly, there seems to be a view that its often easier to consider Forces personnel for redundancy at the same time because its hard to see how they can be continued in service without causing major training, manpower and other challenges.

Its not an attack on the competency of HM Forces, and I hope people see this report for what it is - the deliberate misinterpretation of words, and not a statement suggesting that HM Forces are in any way less competent or professional than the CS.

Its all part of the DT's wider 'if you are an MOD CS you must be EVIL' campaign.

[Cows getting bigger]

Most of the civil servants I came across were more like weebles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weeble) than anything flexible

[Mach Two]

Apparently they can be desk jockies AND immigration officers at the same time! How flexible do you want them to be? :rolleyes:

[Willard Whyte]

Pretty sure I would make a good immigration officer.

Ferries arrive full - ferries go back full.

Of the same people.

[Mach Two]

Ooh. WW. Political satire!!! I like it. Have you considered applying for the post of Head of UKBA? :D

[airborne_artist]

I've seen some very flexible guys and gals in uniform.

Many of them have spent years bent over assuming the position. If you asked a CS to do the same they'd have had the union involved in seconds.

[Jimlad1]

"If you asked a CS to do the same they'd have had the union involved in seconds. "

Is this because they wanted a threesome? :E

[philrigger]

;)

Many of them have spent years bent over assuming the position. If you asked a CS to do the same they'd have had the union involved in seconds.



Not true. Some CS can kiss ass just as well as anyone in the forces.

Phil.

[Halton Brat]

I shall be arriving back in the Green & Pleasant Land on 23 Dec, by ferry, from Le Continent. I am sallying forth to celebrate the Yuletide season with family.

I shall be wearing a top hat & driving the old Shooting Brake - I trust that I will be granted a cordial welcome & granted Free Pratique; indeed my UK passport requires that I be allowed to "pass freely, without let or hindrance".

D'you still drive on the left there?

HB

[Herc-u-lease]

I agree with Jimlad, however one of the main reasons I believe this statement about flexibility is also true is because of the CS recruitment system. CS are recruited into jobs based on 'competencies'. You might think this would imply job or skill competency but it does not. The competences are BS like team working, effective listening etc. You are not allowed to ask questions about experience specific to the role that is being applied for, such as "Do you actually have any experience that would lead me to think you can do this job?"

In terms of employability, a CS who has ticked the boxes could get employed anywhere based on fluffy competence, rather than demonstrable experience and skills; hence the impression of greater flexibility.

However, this brings me back to Tuc's point that people don't necessarily have the right skills for the job and grade.

Outside of government I cannot fathom any employer who would actually recruit like this and expect their workforce to be effective and deliver high productivity.

Overall I've met some very good CS and some who epitomize the stereotype. Same with the mil folks.

H

[jamesdevice]

"Brennan is a very ugly, fat old woman. Errgh."

Dunno about that, but theres no way she could be described as "flexible"

[Bert Angel]

A few years ago the then Staish at Lyneham was interviewed on TV about the Station's role in mounting an overseas operation, in which everyone had bust a gut to prep aircraft to deploy. He said something along the lines of 'My guys were great but when they're replaced by civilians I don't believe we could mount the same kind of operation again.'

Cue lots of demands for his resignation/ sacking by MPs etc for having the temerity to imply that civilian staff weren't more than a match for servicemen.

Apart from on these pages there's been scarce a mention of Brennan's comments.

[sidewayspeak]

Perhaps the civil servants could help in times of need:

man the fire engines when the fire persons are on strike.
kill the cows and bury them when the next foot and mouth strikes.
provide security staff for the Oh-Lym-Pics.
Man the Mountain Rescue teams when the civilian MR asks for help.
Smash their way into an embassy when the police can't cope.
lend a hand in when flooding returns.
etc
etc

Makes my blood boil and only serves to widen the gap between service personnel and the civil service.

[Junglydaz]

I personally find this encouraging. When the next fireperson's strike comes around, we will see Civil Servants manning the Green Goddesses instead of sailors, soldiers and airmen. :D

[Biggus]

Junglydaz,

For what it is worth, the Green Goddesses have all been sold off/scrapped - come the next fireperson's strike, coverage will be provided by companies such as Serco under contract to HMG......

[cazatou]

Junglydaz

It would take some time to negotiate the return of the vehicles from the African Country that the UK sold the serviceable vehicles to.

[Mach Two]

Junglydaz, I got your humour.

[tucumseh]

When the next fireperson's strike comes around, we will see Civil Servants manning the Green Goddesses instead of sailors, soldiers and airmen.


Some of us were formally trained but probably a political decision not to deploy CS. (We also maintained the GGs). 32 years since I attended a fire while on MoD duty. 37 since the last sudden death. Age means I wouldn't be much use now.

[fin1012]

Connect this thread with the news that we might be doing passport duty next week. I propose a firm "f$ck off" would show them just how inflexible we can be when you push us. Using us to cover strikers who are protesting about the same issues which we have to just suck up is outrageous.

[Melchett01]

Using us to cover strikers who are protesting about the same issues which we have to just suck up is outrageous.

But the general opinion amongst many of the CS that work in my organisation seems to be that the military get paid the 'big bucks' so we should crack on without complaint! :mad:

Then again, one of the same CS did let slip that during the early days of TELIC, they were getting £120/day overtime to do a duty officer slot which military personnel did as routine. That was back in 2003, god knows what the rate would be now .... probably why there is only 1 CS who is on a duty roster - the rest disappear around 1600 each day despite constantly reminding us of their 'officer status'. Looks like we're about to get done over by the CS once again. Remind me, which bit of Defence is the tail and which is the dog?

[tucumseh]

Melchett (and others)

But the general opinion amongst many of the CS that work in my organisation seems to be that the military get paid the 'big bucks' so we should crack on without complaint!


I think I've demonstrated many times what side I'm on. The CS needs to buck up and stop dumbing down, although I think it has probably reached rock bottom. I'm probably wrong on that last one.

But, to be fair to any CS with that attitude about "big bucks", I refer you to my example about Requirements Managers and MILSMs - which is what most CS in AbbeyWood see Servicemen doing. When I did those jobs, I was claiming Family Income Supplement for a wife and one child, such was my pay. Promotion into MoD(PE) was a distant aspiration. AbbeyWood still has a few CS who remember those days and twitch at the sight of Lt Colonels and Majors doing the same jobs for 3 times the salary. And one must always remember the rule that CS are required to "crack on without complaint" if these serving officers cannot, or do not want to, do their job (for which very few are trained). The problem is, CS are no longer trained either.

I know, one small example, but it illustrates the root cause of many problems in MoD. The vast majority in AbbeyWood, and that is a goodly proportion of the MoD CS these days, simply has no idea whatsoever what a given CS grade is required to do. Most are at grades at least 2 or 3 above what their job description warrants. Most CS at AbbeyWood look UP to RqMs and MILSMs, not realising these are jobs they should have been competent at themselves, long before being promoted into AbbeyWood. And that is the real root. CS are no longer promoted into AbbeyWood.

I have always said it. The best CS (in acquisition) are those who have worked backwards through the "acquisition cycle". If you haven't worked in the In Service phase, your exposure to Users is very limited, which blights your decision making and attitudes for the rest of your career. Today, that experience, and hence empathy with Users, is positively frowned upon. Management sets the tone. They must change.

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

If you haven't worked in the In Service phase, your exposure to Users is very limited, which blights your decision making and attitudes for the rest of your career.

That is very true. In the days of MoD(PE), though, evidence of that happening, in the Sea Systems Controllerate at least, was very thin. I can't think of many MoD(N) logs wallahs who actually transferred to PE. Under the "new" DE&S regime and it's MDG predecessors, movement to procurement became easier and more advantageous. As you implied earlier, it became an easier route to promotion without having to demonstrate the wider higher grade skill sets. Ah! Functional Competences; what a clever word game for beating more able candidates to a higher grade.

Regarding CSs manning fire stations, not that many have received the necessary level of training as part of their day job. PHOENIX trained and recent Afloat Support staff would be competent but their conditions of service would make it near impossible.

[Grimweasel]

Flexible my ar$e!! Most of the CS I have worked with have been so inflexible in their approach to work ethics, mobility, dynamic thinking etc that I found them irrelevant to day to day operations.

Most care little for promotion or their reports; many have worked at the same units for 15-25 years and are so stuck in their ways that even levering them out of their chairs for a Christmas Lunch is nigh on impossible. The rules that protect them are draconian and its very difficult to get rid of under performers. Admittedly, I have only worked with C grade and below. And don't get me started on that EMR bee-locks!!!

[langleybaston]

Inflexible, was I?

Recruited Scientific Civil Service age 18, 3 cracking good A levels Pure Maths, Applied Maths, Physics, 9 good O levels including English [2] and French. No woodwork, RI or underwaterbasketweaving.

Sent to RAF Uxbridge as an Assistant Scientific, then quickly to Stanmore for 3 months Met. observer training, three years later promoted to Assistant Experimental Officer [degree men could jump in at that level] and sent to programme the very early Ferranti Mercury computer at Dunstable, age 23 sent on Initial Forecast Course 3 months very rigorous exam, to Gatwick as rookie forecaster, to RAF Nicosia ditto, to RAF Leeming, to Advanced Forecast Course, promoted Experimental Officer, to RAF Topcliffe, numerous detachments Acklington Leeming Dishforth, Church Fenton ...... to RAF Guetersloh, to RAF Finningley, GIT COurse, combined teaching RAF and forecasting, promotion board after 10 years relevant experience and numerous staishes giving tick in box, now Senior Experimental Officer [about SLdr level] to HQ to be member team nudging Computer producing numerical forecasts, to Met Office College to teach Cambridge and Oxford Firsts, and Doctors, meteorology, to JHQ Rheindahlen as member forecasting team looking after all N Europe including the Eastern parts, also Taceval Met man, also 1 BR Corps on exercises, promoted after very very probing interview to Principal [age 43 at this point] posted RAF Bawtry as 1 Group Principal Met Officer, to Leeds to set up major regional office, to Cardiff to run SW UK Met, to HQ i/c Met services nuclear and chemical inductries and contingencies, to JHQ again as Chief Met Officer BFG, to Brize Norton retaining the Germany resposibility and all Southern UK military. To grass at 60, decent lump sum and 1/2 pay. I was far from unusual, it is what we did, I just did it better than some.

A family move every three years on average, disciplines: forecasting for military aviation, civil aviation, civil public services,computer programming, teaching and management.

Now, where is that broom?

Easily best customers light blue uniforms, thanks chaps and chappesses.

[sidewayspeak]

Inflexible, was I?

Never worked with you so couldn't say. But your post makes you sound like a boring, irritating old git. Is that what you were trying to portray?

[langleybaston]

I do not descend to rudeness. I am, however, glad we did not meet: most of the RAF and Army that I dealt with, of all ranks, had the instincts of gentlemen.

[sidewayspeak]

I do not descend to rudeness. I am, however, glad we did not meet: most of the RAF and Army that I dealt with, of all ranks, had the instincts of gentlemen.

Are you throwing down your glove grandad? Be careful you don't trip over your pee-pot.

[langleybaston]

Naughty, naughty little troll. I am certainly not going to discuss your problem in public. If you want help, please PM.

[Chugalug2]

LB:
I was far from unusual, it is what we did, I just did it better than some.
The crucial word of course is "it". Seeing as your gratuitous CV appears little more than an account of your rise through the myriad CS grades to Metman Supremo, the temptation on this forum is to equate it to the meteoric rise of the CS's and VSO's who gave us a whole generation of Grossly Unairworthy UK Military Aircraft. It is at least a point in your favour that you could have had no hand in that scandal, presumably. A word to the wise, save the dinner table reminisces for the dinner table.

SS, your posts make you sound like a boring, irritating young git.

[SRENNAPS]

Never worked with you so couldn't say. But your post makes you sound like a boring, irritating old git. Is that what you were trying to portray?

Are you throwing down your glove grandad? Be careful you don't trip over your pee-pot.

There is just no need is there. Did you have a bad Saturday? What, were you in a mood because Man Utd did not win or did someone you like get kicked out of the X factor:ugh::ugh: Sad person!

Some good discussions here. I have personally known many CSs over the years and I have found the majority of them to be hard working, dedicated individuals, who would go the extra mile to resolve an issue or do the “right thing”. I have also known a minority of individuals who were just a pain in the behind. But hey! You get that anywhere, including the RAF.

[Pontius Navigator]

LB, I know 2 met men from near us both. One had been the resident SMetO for ever. The other used to hop about a bit, Ascension, Antarctica etc and once even promoted and posted. His pay dropped so he came back and resumed his shift pay. He too had been basically at the same unit for ever. One of the assistants there, also did ASI, but again was resident for ever.

Your mobility was presumaably by choice and not by dictat.

[langleybaston]

Yes, there were indeed two beasts ....... happy to be mobile, or desperate not to move. The latter were usually people with spouses in better, and immobile, jobs. But the terms and conditions were enforceable mobility for all Met. After about 1980, overseas posts were invariably filled by volunteers.

My initial burst of CV was to demonstrate mobility almost on a par with the RAF, whose camp fires I followed.

[Mach Two]

Thank you for picking that up, SRENNAPS. Sidewayspeak, that was pretty out of order.

[Jimlad1]

Is there a 'most pointless' argument 2011 thread running to which I can nominate some of the posts here.

Yes there are some dire CS, and I've had the misfortune to work with them. The reality of life though is that every job / career / vocation has very good people, and some not very good people. We easily forget the good ones because they work to the level we'd expect, and as such do little to warrant being remembered. We always remember the bad ones because the human brain is wont to remember the irritating things in life.

Is it really worth getting stressed over that a few admin grade CS weren't particularly helpful to you? I can think of more important things out there to worry about.

[tucumseh]

few admin grade CS I wish it were as simple as that.


If asked who had perpetrated the most damage in my field of expertise throughout my career, CS admin staffs would barely feature. There was one particularly idiotic SEO at HQSTC who refused to endorse a spend in the run up to GW1 because he didn’t have a “personal letter saying we were at war”. Luckily, financiers don’t approve funding so he was easily ignored. His stance got him promoted though, and rumour had it he was personally decorated by Saddam for his contribution to the Iraqi war effort.



The main threat from admin staff was RAF Supply Officers. Especially under the outrageously incompetent AMSO/AML regimes from 1987 through to the late 1990s. Their actions can be directly traced through a raft of Coroners Inquests, Boards of Inquiry and Audit reports. They were worse than the above financier and, until 1991 were in cahoots. But they fell out because the Suppliers felt they made a greater contribution – and were right. It was they who should have been decorated. Their anti-UK Forces effort was outstanding.


Of course, then we have the sycophantic non-engineers in PE/DPA/DLO and DE&S who have granted themselves engineering status and delegated authority. They are not even “admin”, because at least true admin staffs have a level of properly delegated authority. No, a non-engineer in an engineering post is something unique to MoD, breeding danger at every signature and death at every turn. It is so stupifyingly irrational that only MoD could dream it up. Unlike the hapless SEO and Suppliers, it is difficult to ignore these people, mainly because they infest the higher reaches of DE&S and can adversely affect your daily life. Also, their ethos has rubbed off on younger, direct-entrant staffs.



But, all that is to be expected and engineers spend their lives being taught how to circumvent such atrocities. What I don’t expect is fellow engineers to ignore all their training, just for the sake of a promotion and not rocking the boat. It is impossible to ignore this lot, because they act by stealth. They have proper delegation, which you can't deny, but abuse it for their own ends. After many years of being a pprune contributor and having the satisfaction of being party to a few successful campaigns, it is the actions of certain engineers, some Service but mainly Civilian, which fill me with disgust. Chief among them, the Chief. Even politicians have been known to fall on their sword if they commission a report and are then criticised in that report. He commissioned many, and all were highly critical of his regime. He did nothing. He wasn’t a CS, but he was supported by many senior CS; all had lost sight of their legal obligations and Duty of Care. It isn’t about CS Vs Services. It’s about Good Vs Bad.

[Chugalug2]

There are some who post on here, myself included no doubt, whose contributions can be disregarded with ease. There are others who should be read once, twice, thrice even, until every bit of what has been said is fully absorbed and understood. The post previous to mine is a classic in that genre, as they always are from tuc. Great post!

[cornish-stormrider]

seconded - it is acknowledged that I am, for want of a better phrase, a thick Cornish oik. meh. I specialise in bad banter and insults against the, uh, erm, rich in years. however I have come across a few individuals who remind me of what a service it was, even if they have the temerity to be such evil as civil sepents.

what's the old axiom - a man rises to the level of his own incompetence - or in Beagle's case thats his own incontinence, old git that he is.....:E

back on track - there are good CS just as there are crap crabs. try to avoid the bad ones.
Remember - flexibility is the key to air power, so the CS must have done it for us then.

fly safe.

CS

[JFZ90]

There is a certain irony in these threads. There are of course good and bad in all walks of life.

I have noticed a correlation however in that only the 'good eggs' actually have the IQ to recognise this - it seems those that don't and are all too eager to stereotype fall into the hard of thinking 'bad apple' category themselves.....

[cornish-stormrider]

Are ee sayin I have IQ? how dare ee! I just realise that chisellers and jobsworths tend to gravitate to the position of least work and most visbility and appearance of work....

it don't mean I'm clever - I turned down the chance to be an occifer -

[HTB]

Flexibility is also the key to...limbo dancing. How low can you go?

As for Civile Servants being more flexible than their military counterparts, it is obviously true. They, being public sector employees, will demonstrate that flexibility on Wednesday, inflicting far more damage on the homeland than an equivalent number of military types.

Mister B

[Pontius Navigator]

It may also be that less flexible, rule-bound CS are more memorable and p*ss us off more than do other more flexible ones. Tuc may have fallen into the first group (he will know what I mean and I am not getting at him).

I also know of some ultra flexible ones. Two, one at ISK used to dock off a weeks home-to-duty if the claim arrived the day before the end of the week claimed. She never told you and it was up to you to spot the short change. OTOH her opposite number spotted that I had made underclaims in the previous 3 years at ISK and undertook to make the claims correct. We are talking 3 figures. Now who would I vote for?

[Courtney Mil]

Right, PN. Good a bad people everywhere. I know plenty of peeps in uniform that specialized in rigitiy and self-serving awkwardness and CSs that would go to the ends of the Earth (literally) for their business.

Of couse, this thread is actually about being "Fexible", which is totally different thing.