AFPRB 2020

[wokkamate]

Has anyone heard any news of when the 49th AFPRB 2020 report will be published, or what the recommendations might be? With MPs awarding themselves 3.1 % we have to be hopeful...... don’t we? 😂

[Door Slider]

Has anyone heard any news of when the 49th AFPRB 2020 report will be published, or what the recommendations might be? With MPs awarding themselves 3.1 % we have to be hopeful...... don’t we? 😂

The government has requested that the AFPRB report to them in April 20, and like last year the announcement and any subsequent award with be delayed and backdated.

The government has stated that in 2021 they will revert back to the traditional times lines.

Regards

[Corporal Clott]

Expectation is Jul/Aug 20 with the standard faff of being back-dated 6 months later in Sep 20 for the change since 1 Apr 20. If you are serving Aircrew in the RAF (Regular or Reserve), with a Defence Gateway account, then this sort of stuff has been discussed on the Defence Connect “Crew Room” by the Branch Advisors and the Pay Team. No Rumour, only fact... :ok:

[unclenelli]

I've said this before....!!!!

A 2.9%, split into 2%, then 2 chunks of non-contributable 0.9% was effectively a wage advance that no-one wanted.
It was claimed back automatically when we got 2.9% again (we'd already had 0.9%), so everyone got real-terms 2% again!
We were promised 6.5% over 3 years! So don't expect the maths to add up!!!!!

2.9% + 2.9% = 5.8%, so expect 0.7% (below Austerity, but likely to be blamed on Covid-19)
2% + 2% with 0.9% already borrowed and paid back = 4.9%, so you should be getting 1.6% after Austerity. Brace yourselves for it...!!!


It took the Govt 4 Months to dream up this Smoke & Mirrors, but I saw through it in 4 Seconds - Just 1 of the reasons I decided to leave for the Private Sector!!!









BIG TIP (My Opinion Only - Please take advise from Forces Pension Society or other IFA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - it depends on each individual circumstances!!!!!!!!!!!!):
If you commutate your pension, so ALL your lump sum is tax free (mine got me debt-free!) & your remaining annual pension falls just short of/close to £12500, then call HMRC and get your 1250L tax code (or other tax-code/amount if you borrow from your spouse) allocated to it!
As an Agency driver, my MOD Pension#1 is now 100% tax-free, I only pay tax on my sporadic/random work days (~3 days each week!!!!). If I only work 1 day, I get an NI credit, but only pay tax for 1 day - If I work 5 days, I get an NI credit and pay 5 days of tax!
If I get a full-time job, then I may probably change it to my larger guaranteed income!!
Any rebate between MOD Pension#1 and Tax-Code each April gets thrown into WorkPlace Pension Pot#2, although I might have to make a 1-off NI Contributrion to cover a 5-week training period in November, paid for by CPT/myself, so no earnings for that period.

[Corporal Clott]

A very good rumour source says that it will now be out earlier than planned and that it will be 2.5%. Watch and shoot...watch and shoot...

[CAC Runaway]

Anyone know if this was delivered on time to the Government in April? Could be very interesting to see whether we get anything in this current "unprecedented" time. What about the NHS too, wonder if they will get a different award to us.

[Door Slider]

Anyone know if this was delivered on time to the Government in April? Could be very interesting to see whether we get anything in this current "unprecedented" time. What about the NHS too, wonder if they will get a different award to us.

The NHS are currently in 3 year pay deal which expires in 21, perhaps the government will revise up what was agreed 3 years ago due to Covid who knows.

Public sectors pay awards are generally always different between departments, historically the military tend to fair better but I’m thinking for the next few years we might be back to 0%,time will tell.

The Service pay chiefs have been trying to get a similar 3 year pay deal like the NHS but it’s not happened yet, in recent times anyway.

[Lima Juliet]

Tuesday or Wednesday???

[Lima Juliet]

2% it is then...


https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1361/1768a41e_7d08_4bfe_94de_5732494ab72c_12eabdba0dc80a94425a474 e513114efb4714e5e.jpeg

[Professor Plum]

LJ,

Thanks for posting. I must admit I was expecting a pay freeze, because the government can’t afford it right now due to COVID - but jazzed up a bit with political speak.

Welcome news.

[Melchett01]

LJ,

Thanks for posting. I must admit I was expecting a pay freeze, because the government can’t afford it right now due to COVID - but jazzed up a bit with political speak.

Welcome news.

I suspect several years of pay freezes are just round the corner and this will be the last rise for a while.

[Professor Plum]

Melchett,

I hope you’re wrong - but I think you’re right!

[Party Animal]

For those of us working temporarily overseas, is there anything official yet? Or are we purely relying on the meeja?

[OldnDaft]

For those of us working temporarily overseas, is there anything official yet? Or are we purely relying on the meeja?
Yes, confirmed and published on MODNet

[just another jocky]

Melchett,

I hope you’re wrong - but I think you’re right!

I think he's right as I gather it's from existing funds.....so what gets cut?

[Sandy Parts]

now on interweb for those without PLODNet
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/armed-forces-personnel-to-receive-2-pay-rise

[Professor Plum]

The AFPRB 2020 report is here...


https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/902421/CCS0520587976-001_00_AFPRB_2020_Web_Accessible.pdf

Good news for the RPAS Ladies/Gents. Para 3.63

[Easy Street]

Para 3.41... a very welcome ‘mea culpa’ from the AFPRB on RRP, just as SofS predicts the end of the piloting profession!

MOD’s framework for considering RRPs under four factors has served to highlight to us that in many cases, the description of such payments as “recruitment and retention” is inappropriate. For some payments, the appropriate title would be a skill-based supplement. We acknowledge that the title of RRP for all such payments was made at our behest some years ago, but after considerable reflection, for our next round, we would welcome MOD’s analysis of all RRPs so that they can be appropriately re-categorised. MOD should also give serious consideration to the creation or amendment of bespoke pay spines that integrate the current skill category wide RRPs for such groups where RRPs are effectively structural components of pay such as Special Forces, submariners and pilots.

The name ‘RRP‘ gave cover to the intimidatory nonsense of its removal upon early termination. Hopefully that unjust policy will go swiftly in the light of these comments. And I wonder if there will be some scribblies disappointed that the rug has been pulled out from under a grand plan to get rid of ‘flying pay’ entirely (I have just renamed it in line with AFPRB intent).

Next, make it pensionable.

Actually, where do the AFPRB’s comments leave the flying pay reforms which a few years ago delayed rewarding a ‘skill’ for 7 years to act as a retention measure? All change, please, all change...

[thelizardking]

The AFPRB 2020 report is here...


https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/902421/CCS0520587976-001_00_AFPRB_2020_Web_Accessible.pdf

Good news for the RPAS Ladies/Gents. Para 3.63

That is good news, but a consequence of this ( though in no way should this discredit the RPAS guys) is that now FJ selected pilots will receive RRP about 3 years later than all the other pilots, including RPAS. Some savvy pilots already don't want to go jets as they realise that they will be significantly better off selected as multi engine- hitting every promotion and pay band scale earlier and then of course leaving at the first opportunity.
..how will this help?

[PPRuNeUser0211]

That is good news, but a consequence of this ( though in no way should this discredit the RPAS guys) is that now FJ selected pilots will receive RRP about 3 years later than all the other pilots, including RPAS. Some savvy pilots already don't want to go jets as they realise that they will be significantly better off selected as multi engine- hitting every promotion and pay band scale earlier and then of course leaving at the first opportunity.
..how will this help?
It's almost as if someone should decide on the shortest route to flying pay (course time only), set a timeline based on that and award people flying pay based on remaining in the flying training system after that time to ensure fairness. 72 weeks sounds like a pretty solid number off the top of my head.

[Lima Juliet]

INCORRECT!

Since 1 Apr 17, all Officer Aircrew receive their first Tier 1 RRP(F) some 6 years after starting Flying Training - regardless of the type they end up on. However, to get onto Tier 2 RRP(F) then that is 6 years after completion of OCU which is different for all as each OCU differs in length and the amount of time you take to get there. So, everyone now gets RRP(F) at roughly the same time in their cohort, but the jump to Tier 2 differs for everyone. :ok:

There is a review on RRP(F) and PAS for AFPRB 2022 - they are 5 yearly reviews, with the last one being AFPRB 2017 when the latest scheme came in.

[PPRuNeUser0211]

INCORRECT!

Since 1 Apr 17, all Officer Aircrew receive their first Tier 1 RRP(F) some 6 years after starting Flying Training - regardless of the type they end up on. However, to get onto Tier 2 RRP(F) then that is 6 years after completion of OCU which is different for all as each OCU differs in length and the amount of time you take to get there. So, everyone now gets RRP(F) at roughly the same time in their cohort, but the jump to Tier 2 differs for everyone. :ok:

There is a review on RRP(F) and PAS for AFPRB 2022 - they are 5 yearly reviews, with the last one being AFPRB 2017 when the latest scheme came in.
Which would be great if tier 1 wasn't a shadow of its' former self LJ?

[trim it out]

Which would be great if tier 1 wasn't a shadow of its' former self LJ?
Tier 2 isn’t too shabby though, and will be awarded before an individual would have received middle rate on the old system.

[thelizardking]

INCORRECT!

Since 1 Apr 17, all Officer Aircrew receive their first Tier 1 RRP(F) some 6 years after starting Flying Training - regardless of the type they end up on. However, to get onto Tier 2 RRP(F) then that is 6 years after completion of OCU which is different for all as each OCU differs in length and the amount of time you take to get there. So, everyone now gets RRP(F) at roughly the same time in their cohort, but the jump to Tier 2 differs for everyone. :ok:

There is a review on RRP(F) and PAS for AFPRB 2022 - they are 5 yearly reviews, with the last one being AFPRB 2017 when the latest scheme came in.

Well, there you go, good gen. Not as bad as i thought but still penalises those who go the FJ route by about 2-3 years ( 4 if they go Lightning as the OCU is comically long) once holds are taken into account. There are also going to be some truly exceptional wage differences on the FL between people of the same rank, some FL on about 47k with some on approx 70k...maybe 75-80k if they are PAS.

"Tier 2 isn’t too shabby though, and will be awarded before an individual would have received middle rate on the old system"

by which i assume you mean the newer 'old' system? Surely if you went RPAS on the old system ( assuming you got RRP for RPAS)
you could have been on middle rate by about 6 years after starting flying training?

[trim it out]

by which i assume you mean the newer 'old' system? Surely if you went RPAS on the old system ( assuming you got RRP for RPAS)
you could have been on middle rate by about 6 years after starting flying training?
If it took 2 years to go from Crow to Pro on RPAS then yes, middle rate by your 6th year is achievable.

The penalisation for FJ is just the way the cookie crumbles. Same as Dark Blue RW types are seen off by pingers who go straight to OCU after advanced rotary without having to do the tactics course, or the Army types that go on a 12 week CTT compared to a 9 month one for a different platform. RRP(f) is the sweetener once you are finally useful on a front line type.

[Nil_Drift]

I'm interested to see that there is to be a review of PAS for AFPRB 2022. Do you know/think it will also address the fact that there is no PAS pension or is it just rates. I'm on Lvl 33 and retire on AFPS 75 in two years so it'd be great if some decent change took place just before I leave!

Nil_Drift

[alfred_the_great]

Well, there you go, good gen. Not as bad as i thought but still penalises those who go the FJ route by about 2-3 years ( 4 if they go Lightning as the OCU is comically long) once holds are taken into account. There are also going to be some truly exceptional wage differences on the FL between people of the same rank, some FL on about 47k with some on approx 70k...maybe 75-80k if they are PAS.

"Tier 2 isn’t too shabby though, and will be awarded before an individual would have received middle rate on the old system"

by which i assume you mean the newer 'old' system? Surely if you went RPAS on the old system ( assuming you got RRP for RPAS)
you could have been on middle rate by about 6 years after starting flying training?

A pilot whinging about other people being paid more than them? My irony meter has just flickered.

[Chauderon]

It's almost as if someone should decide on the shortest route to flying pay (course time only), set a timeline based on that and award people flying pay based on remaining in the flying training system after that time to ensure fairness. 72 weeks sounds like a pretty solid number off the top of my head.

Sounds familiar :)

[First_In_Last_Out]

And why is that a problem? Or unfair? Ah you must be the majority of the Air Force that sees actual aviation as an inconvenience.........

*edited to be aimed at Alfred the "great" who appears to add no value to this forum

[BEagle]

[...]roughly the same time in their cohort[...]

Is 'cohort' the latest bizz-speak wanque-word?

Cohort - an ancient Roman military unit, comprising six centuries, equal to one tenth of a legion.

[Lima Juliet]

Is 'cohort' the latest bizz-speak wanque-word?

Well the Aircrew cohort are almost exactly 10% of the RAF... :cool:

[Lima Juliet]

cohort
noun [ C ] (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/help/codes.html)
UK /ˈkəʊhɔːt/ US

a group (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/group) of people (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/people) who share (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/share) a characteristic (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/characteristic), usually age (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/age):
About 42% of women in this age (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/age) cohort have a college (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/college)degree (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/degree).
This year's cohort of graduates (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/graduate) will have particular (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/particular)difficulties (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/difficulty) finding (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/finding) jobs (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/job).

Consider yourself edified, Beags...

[BEagle]

How typical that such a stupid usage should have such a source.....

'tis utter bolleaux!

[Harley Quinn]

Is 'cohort' the latest bizz-speak wanque-word?
...
Tis utter bolleaux
Am I the only one who detects a hint of irony?

[thelizardking]

A pilot whinging about other people being paid more than them? My irony meter has just flickered.

Don't really get what you mean.

Do you think that aircrew aren't worthy of RRP and that anyone can do the job? A pilot who is selected and then goes through years of training, finally arrives at the front line and then works hard and spends a lot of time away wanting to earn a wage sufficient enough to keep them in isn't whinging. Its exactly the wrong kind of attitude where we think people who are 28 by the time they reach the front line and realise that the people they were on IOT with are pushing for SL already won't be a bit p**sed off.

[trim it out]

Don't really get what you mean.

Do you think that aircrew aren't worthy of RRP and that anyone can do the job? A pilot who is selected and then goes through years of training, finally arrives at the front line and then works hard and spends a lot of time away wanting to earn a wage sufficient enough to keep them in isn't whinging. Its exactly the wrong kind of attitude where we think people who are 28 by the time they reach the front line and realise that the people they were on IOT with are pushing for SL already won't be a bit p**sed off.
I believe the phrase is “take a chance, pick your branch” :ok:

[Sandy Parts]

I'm interested to see that there is to be a review of PAS for AFPRB 2022. Do you know/think it will also address the fact that there is no PAS pension or is it just rates. I'm on Lvl 33 and retire on AFPS 75 in two years so it'd be great if some decent change took place just before I leave!

Nil_Drift
Not sure what you mean by “no PAS pension”?
Your AFPS75 pension is based on your final salary which means it a much better deal then aircrew not on PAS who’s Retention Pay (‘flying pay’) is not included in the calculation.
I suspect a review will mainly focus on the level limits to adjust for the longer service with MEOS60. Just my guess.

[thelizardking]

I believe the phrase is “take a chance, pick your branch” :ok:

I get that, and from an individual point of view, that's absolutely fine. However from a service point of view it will only add to the discontent and decreasing numbers of people actually wanting to stay on in the service. The flying isn't as good as it was, the conditions are getting worse, the benefits are getting worse, the pension is worse ( back on track) and you earn as much as your admin/eng counterpart (In truth, less because they are probably promoted at that point) for the first 6 years (actually you don't start flying training the day you graduate you usually hold for a year or so, so actually more like 7 or 8 years).

The numbers are telling, FL pilots are actually leaving ( COVID might have done some 'good' for the numbers but its still true), more telling is that people are turning down promotion and removing themselves from QWI courses before they even start as they don't want to get tied into a longer RoS.

[thelizardking]

I heard yesterday that the 2015 pension for PAS doesn't take the RRP (extra) into account, is this true? I cannot find that. I.E. A Flt Lt earns 47k and 19k RRP, the Flt Lt PAS pension would be based on 47k even though the total wage would be 66k?

[PPRuNeUser0211]

I heard yesterday that the 2015 pension for PAS doesn't take the RRP (extra) into account, is this true? I cannot find that. I.E. A Flt Lt earns 47k and 19k RRP, the Flt Lt PAS pension would be based on 47k even though the total wage would be 66k?
Not true for the current 2015 pension. That is categorically not the case. Total bolleaux. Etc.

[trim it out]

I get that, and from an individual point of view, that's absolutely fine. However from a service point of view it will only add to the discontent and decreasing numbers of people actually wanting to stay on in the service. The flying isn't as good as it was, the conditions are getting worse, the benefits are getting worse, the pension is worse ( back on track) and you earn as much as your admin/eng counterpart (In truth, less because they are probably promoted at that point) for the first 6 years (actually you don't start flying training the day you graduate you usually hold for a year or so, so actually more like 7 or 8 years).

The numbers are telling, FL pilots are actually leaving ( COVID might have done some 'good' for the numbers but its still true), more telling is that people are turning down promotion and removing themselves from QWI courses before they even start as they don't want to get tied into a longer RoS.
I fully concur with you and I am on your side of the fence in the crew room complaining, but allow me to play some devil's advocate if you will (I'm bored in isolation.)

Flying pay is a recruitment and retention payment. Was I "recruited" because of it? No, I didn't even know it was a thing when I filled out the application paper. The retention part is the bit that I disagree with, but understand, from a tax payers point of view. As a pilot am I more likely to stay in if I'm paid better from day 1 of being qualified? Probably, I can feather my nest from a younger age, holidays, cars, Sqn Breitlings and Bremonts, home etc etc but from a tax payers perspective, why is someone being given a retention payment when they don't need to be retained for the first 6 years as they are on a RoS contract? Add don't forget they will begin to receive Tier 1 after 6 years from starting flying training so could be getting RRP(F) before they're even qualified and useful, which upsets those that worked hard to pass the course to get the reward.

Perhaps it will take a generation or so to see if the change in flying pay is working as a retention incentive. I'm sure the closer to the 6 year point people get, the more they may become "I'll see how it goes".

And who knows what state the aviation industry will be in in 6 years time!

[PARALLEL TRACK]

And who knows what state the aviation industry will be in in 6 years time!

6 months time more like!

[Door Slider]

I heard yesterday that the 2015 pension for PAS doesn't take the RRP (extra) into account, is this true? I cannot find that. I.E. A Flt Lt earns 47k and 19k RRP, the Flt Lt PAS pension would be based on 47k even though the total wage would be 66k?


There was a rumour doing the rounds last year suggesting what you described as an option for a new pension scheme (If 15 was replaced due to the legal case). However, it’s not the case for pension 15.

[thelizardking]

I fully concur with you and I am on your side of the fence in the crew room complaining, but allow me to play some devil's advocate if you will (I'm bored in isolation.)

Flying pay is a recruitment and retention payment. Was I "recruited" because of it? No, I didn't even know it was a thing when I filled out the application paper. The retention part is the bit that I disagree with, but understand, from a tax payers point of view. As a pilot am I more likely to stay in if I'm paid better from day 1 of being qualified? Probably, I can feather my nest from a younger age, holidays, cars, Sqn Breitlings and Bremonts, home etc etc but from a tax payers perspective, why is someone being given a retention payment when they don't need to be retained for the first 6 years as they are on a RoS contract? Add don't forget they will begin to receive Tier 1 after 6 years from starting flying training so could be getting RRP(F) before they're even qualified and useful, which upsets those that worked hard to pass the course to get the reward.

Perhaps it will take a generation or so to see if the change in flying pay is working as a retention incentive. I'm sure the closer to the 6 year point people get, the more they may become "I'll see how it goes".

And who knows what state the aviation industry will be in in 6 years time!

All very fair points. The bit i can never get my head around is surely to answer the tax payer you explain 'it costs between £2m and £4m to train a pilot depending on type, but we don't want to seem like we are 'overpaying' them, so we lose them for £20k a year for 15 years and then train another one....'?

Anyway, i think you are correct in 6 years we will see if it worked, they'd better hope it does as a Flt Lt maxes out pay bands after 7 years.

[trim it out]

Anyway, i think you are correct in 6 years we will see if it worked, they'd better hope it does as a Flt Lt maxes out pay bands after 7 years.
I'm not familiar with the RAF way of doing business with regards to selection for PAS, but if a level 7 Flt Lt is on £50,957 base + £20,753 RRP(F) then they can't complain too much, with PAS they can go up to level 30, £81,701 pensionable. That's not bad considering they might just be a line QHI at Shawbury with their only responsibility being to stay awake through MATE brief after MATE brief monotony ;) And not to mention the freebies/subsidised, dental, medical, gym, accommodation, scoff, world class flying training system etc :E

[Fortissimo]

This is only about pay if disparity in its award across a particular cohort persuades the person with the best combination of intellectual, leadership, managerial and physical gifts to leave. And if that person might in other circumstances have become CAS, that would appear to be an own goal from a Service perspective. It is made much worse if the route chosen for the individual (let's say F35) means their much-delayed arrival on the front line handicaps them in competition with less-capable contemporaries. If you have to hold for long enough, there is no way your age/rank profile will put you into the running for eg squadron or station command, as you will not have the time left to serve for the system to capitalise on its investment in you. Losing out on a job to someone who joined the same day as you but is less capable than you, and who is already £10K plus ahead of you in career earnings, is hardly an incentive to commit to an organisation that manages 'talent' that way.

I can think of one exceptionally gifted person who retired early as a sqn ldr, having realised the 4 years he had spent holding meant he would retire as a wg cdr at best. I was unable to help him, which is still a source of regret.

PS. Cohort is such a good word...

[cheifofdefence]

This is only about pay if disparity in its award across a particular cohort persuades the person with the best combination of intellectual, leadership, managerial and physical gifts to leave. And if that person might in other circumstances have become CAS, that would appear to be an own goal from a Service perspective. It is made much worse if the route chosen for the individual (let's say F35) means their much-delayed arrival on the front line handicaps them in competition with less-capable contemporaries. If you have to hold for long enough, there is no way your age/rank profile will put you into the running for eg squadron or station command, as you will not have the time left to serve for the system to capitalise on its investment in you. Losing out on a job to someone who joined the same day as you but is less capable than you, and who is already £10K plus ahead of you in career earnings, is hardly an incentive to commit to an organisation that manages 'talent' that way.

I can think of one exceptionally gifted person who retired early as a sqn ldr, having realised the 4 years he had spent holding meant he would retire as a wg cdr at best. I was unable to help him, which is still a source of regret.

PS. Cohort is such a good word...

Interested to know what you mean 'less capable' - do you mean in terms of flying ability or all-round leadership ability (I am assuming the latter)? If there is one thing I learned in my 20 plus years in the Service, flying ability does not necessarily equate to leadership ability, which is probably why the AFPRB report highlights that only 19% of RAF personnel agree that the senior leadership (which still tends to be aircrew heavy) understand and represent their interests, which is one of the key roles of a leader. We don't necessarily need F35 pilots at the top, just people who can lead the organisation. Finally, I did hear some work was being done on presenting 'out of zone' candidates to the promotion boards, I presume to address any 'penalty' brought about by extended holds, but not sure if this has actually been adopted??

[alfred_the_great]

One must remember that only FJ pilots can become senior Officers. All others should know their place, and try not to get in the way of the pre-ordained nature of "mates" getting promoted.

[Bob Viking]

I hear your points about leadership but can you honestly say that a non-aircrew Officer will really understand air power to a sufficient enough level to command an armed force whose primary role is the delivery of just that?

Many may take me to task on that issue but, pettiness aside, does anyone honestly think an adminer should be in charge of the RAF?

AtG. Andy Pulford might disagree with your last post. He might also ask you to remove the chip from your shoulder.
Whilst I understand your post was probably meant as banter, so was mine.

BV

[Just This Once...]

Even a lowly kipper-fleet pilot made it to CinC / 4 star rank. A bit fishy.

[flyingkeyboard]

I hear your points about leadership but can you honestly say that a non-aircrew Officer will really understand air power to a sufficient enough level to command an armed force whose primary role is the delivery of just that?

Many may take me to task on that issue but, pettiness aside, does anyone honestly think an adminer should be in charge of the RAF?

AtG. Andy Pulford might disagree with your last post. He might also ask you to remove the chip from your shoulder.
Whilst I understand your post was probably meant as banter, so was mine.

BV

A starred member of the Air Force Board recently briefed CE Officers that if they buy into the Astra concept, they could be a future CAS.

[thelizardking]

I'm not familiar with the RAF way of doing business with regards to selection for PAS, but if a level 7 Flt Lt is on £50,957 base + £20,753 RRP(F) then they can't complain too much, with PAS they can go up to level 30, £81,701 pensionable. That's not bad considering they might just be a line QHI at Shawbury with their only responsibility being to stay awake through MATE brief after MATE brief monotony ;) And not to mention the freebies/subsidised, dental, medical, gym, accommodation, scoff, world class flying training system etc :E

the point being that it will take them somewhere between 12 and 15 years to get to that.

[trim it out]

the point being that it will take them somewhere between 12 and 15 years to get to that.
What’s the average age of pilot entrants at IOT these days? 22ish? £70k by your mid 30s is not to be sniffed at. If it’s not enough then there are a few dets available for the LSA and LOA (I’m still in devil’s advocate mode :E).

[Red Line Entry]

Bob,

your posts are almost invariably well reasoned and insightful, but this is a rare occasion where I disagree with your premise. While oversight of the actual employment of air power may require first-hand knowledge of the business of flying (so, Air Component Commander or DComOps) this is not the job of a CAS. Her (or his) role is the strategic leadership of the entire organisation and is almost always carried out in a peacetime environment where the ability to operate in a highly political, finance-driven, media-intensive environment and deliver the best long-term outcomes for a £6Bn, 30,000 strong organisations might not be related to hand-eye coordination capabilities at age 18.

That is not to say that some pilots couldn’t potentially do the job of course! However, many other branches spend a much higher proportion of their careers leading and managing people, money, infrastructure, contractors, and the public than the average pilot.

Merely as an example, we currently have a 3 star engineer in Town who many think would be an excellent CAS.

[London Eye]

Bob,
Merely as an example, we currently have a 3 star engineer in Town who many think would be an excellent CAS.

And many things that would once have been unthinkable are now being thought!

https://des.mod.uk/new-director-general-air-announced/

[alfred_the_great]

I hear your points about leadership but can you honestly say that a non-aircrew Officer will really understand air power to a sufficient enough level to command an armed force whose primary role is the delivery of just that?

Many may take me to task on that issue but, pettiness aside, does anyone honestly think an adminer should be in charge of the RAF?

AtG. Andy Pulford might disagree with your last post. He might also ask you to remove the chip from your shoulder.
Whilst I understand your post was probably meant as banter, so was mine.

BV

what is most interesting is that nearly all the RAF People I know are far less arrogant than the median on here.

None of the pilots (or WSOs) want to achieve high rank, mainly because they'd have to stop flying fairly early on - because the route to the top now involves a combination of capability management experience with proven financial skills.

Given that that none of the sS Chiefs are used to direct combat power, I fail to understand why your spatial perception, 2.4km run time or hand eye co-ordination should be the ultimate filter to become one.

[Foghorn Leghorn]

Bob,

your posts are almost invariably well reasoned and insightful, but this is a rare occasion where I disagree with your premise. While oversight of the actual employment of air power may require first-hand knowledge of the business of flying (so, Air Component Commander or DComOps) this is not the job of a CAS. Her (or his) role is the strategic leadership of the entire organisation and is almost always carried out in a peacetime environment where the ability to operate in a highly political, finance-driven, media-intensive environment and deliver the best long-term outcomes for a £6Bn, 30,000 strong organisations might not be related to hand-eye coordination capabilities at age 18.

That is not to say that some pilots couldn’t potentially do the job of course! However, many other branches spend a much higher proportion of their careers leading and managing people, money, infrastructure, contractors, and the public than the average pilot.

Merely as an example, we currently have a 3 star engineer in Town who many think would be an excellent CAS.

Nope, BV is spot on.

There are 2 aspects to this. The first being that a pilot inherently understands and has a visceral appreciation of the application of Air and Space Power; which, after all, is why the RAF exists.

Secondly, It would be reputationally embarrassing to not have a pilot command the RAF. That would be the view from many civilians that wouldn’t necessarily understand.

[Red Line Entry]

Foghorn,

I think Major General Tonje Skinnarland, a scopie, might disagree. The Norwegian public don't seem to have risen in revolt following her appointment either.

[alfred_the_great]

Nope, BV is spot on.

There are 2 aspects to this. The first being that a pilot inherently understands and has a visceral appreciation of the application of Air and Space Power; which, after all, is why the RAF exists.

Secondly, It would be reputationally embarrassing to not have a pilot command the RAF. That would be the view from many civilians that wouldn’t necessarily understand.

would you be brave enough to tell that to Stu Peach's face?

and if you are, can I come and watch?

[cheifofdefence]

At the risk of thread-drift, I acknowledge that the requirement for aircrew to 'head' the organisation is worthy of debate however my observation is that the majority of the future 'leaders' of the RAF are effectively identified very early on in their careers primarily based on flying ability, not leadership ability. I was once told by a deskie that in order to have the 'reach' to get to CAS you need to be promoted to Sqn Ldr around the age of 30 - but what 'leadership' qualities have you displayed by then as aircrew? I've had many a conversation with flying colleagues about the concept of 'leadership in the air' (e.g. 4-ship lead) but to me this is more in line with management of a task (albeit very skilled management) rather than any ability to motivate, engage, develop etc. Indeed the most important box on the OJAR to my mind (if it still exists) when it comes to assessing leadership potential is the one that assesses 'subordinate development' - but what opportunity have aircrew had to display this? This is not to say that aircrew can't be good leaders, but that the behaviours they are selected, promoted and identified by early on in their careers are not necessarily the ones required to 'lead' the organisation at the more senior levels. Indeed I still recall a former VSO (3*?) addressing a leadership conference a couple of years ago effectively saying that he had got to the top by being the arrogant fighter pilot who knew how to do everything and that if he shouted louder people would jump higher and that's how he had been taught to do leadership (or words to that effect). This is not to say that aircrew cannot/do not make good leaders, but that the ability to fly an F35 does not necessarily make you a more capable leader than your peers.

PS Although I have not personally met him I have heard similar comments to RLE's regarding the 3* Engineer.

[Foghorn Leghorn]

would you be brave enough to tell that to Stu Peach's face?

and if you are, can I come and watch?

I would have no problem telling that to his face. He’s a rude man that has little problem with being rather nasty to others.

[Foghorn Leghorn]

At the risk of thread-drift, I acknowledge that the requirement for aircrew to 'head' the organisation is worthy of debate however my observation is that the majority of the future 'leaders' of the RAF are effectively identified very early on in their careers primarily based on flying ability, not leadership ability. I was once told by a deskie that in order to have the 'reach' to get to CAS you need to be promoted to Sqn Ldr around the age of 30 - but what 'leadership' qualities have you displayed by then as aircrew? I've had many a conversation with flying colleagues about the concept of 'leadership in the air' (e.g. 4-ship lead) but to me this is more in line with management of a task (albeit very skilled management) rather than any ability to motivate, engage, develop etc. Indeed the most important box on the OJAR to my mind (if it still exists) when it comes to assessing leadership potential is the one that assesses 'subordinate development' - but what opportunity have aircrew had to display this? This is not to say that aircrew can't be good leaders, but that the behaviours they are selected, promoted and identified by early on in their careers are not necessarily the ones required to 'lead' the organisation at the more senior levels. Indeed I still recall a former VSO (3*?) addressing a leadership conference a couple of years ago effectively saying that he had got to the top by being the arrogant fighter pilot who knew how to do everything and that if he shouted louder people would jump higher and that's how he had been taught to do leadership (or words to that effect). This is not to say that aircrew cannot/do not make good leaders, but that the ability to fly an F35 does not necessarily make you a more capable leader than your peers.

PS Although I have not personally met him I have heard similar comments to RLE's regarding the 3* Engineer.

This same old notion that aircrew are selected on the merits of airborne leadership is so last century. It’s the usual trope that is trotted out by people whom are unaware of how the system works.

For a start, one’s airborne ability is written about on a separate Aircrew Insert Slip to an OJAR.

Everyone is so much more ‘aware’ of leadership now, it’s merits, failings and what are thought be its components are, due to the numerous courses that are conducted throughout one’s career which focus on this very subject.

[cheifofdefence]

Foghorn, not sure if you are agreeing or challenging! I'm not saying that aircrew are selected on the merits of 'airborne leadership' but that this is the response I get when challenging colleagues about what leadership potential junior aircrew officers have displayed (again this is not to say that they do not possess leadership qualities but that they have had little opportunity to practice, display and develop them). I do agree that everyone is much more aware of leadership which is probably why the AFCAS results (as alluded to in the AFPRB report) do not make favorable reading when it comes to personnel's views on their confidence in the senior leadership of the Service and the extent to which change is managed well (which to me is a leadership function despite the use of the word 'managed'). I also think that we tend to promote on followership rather than leadership - who writes your OJAR - indeed I had one Sqn boss who spent all his time making sure the stats were up to date and no time at all engaging with his people and making them feel part of the team....unsurprisingly he went on to air rank and was still the same when I recently bumped into him at Air Command.

[Bob Viking]

I don’t expect everyone to agree with me and I accept I may not be correct.

My view though is that it might be a little embarrassing when the person in charge of the Air Force finds themselves at a high level meeting and may have to turn to an advisor for help with basic air-minded questions.

I’m sorry, but with the best will in the world and all the managerial and organisational skills an individual can muster, I just can’t imagine many, if any, non aircrew individuals possessing the appropriate level of knowledge of air power to pass muster.

As much as everyone hates aircrew and thinks we are all a bunch of prima donnas I’m afraid the role of the RAF is the delivery of Air Power. The airborne portion is done by aircrew and everyone else is there to support that.

You can disagree with me all you like but I will take some convincing that the individual who leads the Air Force should not be aircrew.

You will note I haven’t said Fast Jet and I haven’t said pilot.

BV

[alfred_the_great]

An RN anslogy

https://wavellroom.com/2018/11/06/how-to-grow-a-leader-exploring-the-case-for-a-non-warfare-officer-first-sea-lord/

and BV - to ask a question to your straw man, do you have an examples of senior non-aviator RAF Officers having to as simple air-based questions? And how is that different to an aviator having to ask an analogous question on logistics, HR, engineering etc?

[Bob Viking]

I do not have any specific examples and I’m not about to waste a single second trying to find any.

In fact my point about the ‘high level’ briefing was largely hypothetical as well in an attempt to illustrate a point. You seem to want to pick my ‘straw man’ argument to pieces so feel free. I won’t waste too much thought or energy countering you.

In broad terms the Chief of the Air Staff needs an extensive working knowledge of his/her assets. That comes from operating them. You don’t need to be a pilot and you don’t need to have flown every platform but the multitude of considerations and levels of knowledge that need to be possessed to understand the implications and capabilities of air power are extremely unlikely to come from an individual who has never flown.

The non aircrew VSO may well be an incredible leader of people (and I understand the argument in your article) but when you need to direct people into harms way in aircraft and make decisions and representations about what assets are required it will definitely help if you have some experience in the field of aviation.

This argument will basically fall on one of two sides. Those who think CAS should be aircrew (probably mostly consisting of aircrew) and those that think CAS need not be aircrew (probably mostly by those who are not aircrew).

If I’m honest I’m not sure I really care either way and BV’s opinion will not affect things one bit. I’ll call CAS Sir/Ma’am regardless and my life won’t really be affected much regardless of their branch.

BV

[alfred_the_great]

I do not have any specific examples and I’m not about to waste a single second trying to find any.

In fact my point about the ‘high level’ briefing was largely hypothetical as well in an attempt to illustrate a point. You seem to want to pick my ‘straw man’ argument to pieces so feel free. I won’t waste too much thought or energy countering you.

In broad terms the Chief of the Air Staff needs an extensive working knowledge of his/her assets. That comes from operating them. You don’t need to be a pilot and you don’t need to have flown every platform but the multitude of considerations and levels of knowledge that need to be possessed to understand the implications and capabilities of air power are extremely unlikely to come from an individual who has never flown.

The non aircrew VSO may well be an incredible leader of people (and I understand the argument in your article) but when you need to direct people into harms way in aircraft and make decisions and representations about what assets are required it will definitely help if you have some experience in the field of aviation.

This argument will basically fall on one of two sides. Those who think CAS should be aircrew (probably mostly consisting of aircrew) and those that think CAS need not be aircrew (probably mostly by those who are not aircrew).

If I’m honest I’m not sure I really care either way and BV’s opinion will not affect things one bit. I’ll call CAS Sir/Ma’am regardless and my life won’t really be affected much regardless of their branch.

BV

<thumbs up emoji>

[BEagle]

[…]do you have an examples of senior non-aviator RAF Officers having to ask simple air-based questions?

Many years ago, a very pleasant senior non-aircrew type came to discuss his report and to ask about retention etc. One topic which cropped up was the (can't remember what it was called as I avoided it) month long course at Henlow which JOs who couldn't out run the Boss were often collared for. I suggested that it would be less disruptive if the course could be between tours as it would have less impact on currency.

"What's currency", he asked. He was genuinely thankful for the explanation as he had no knowledge of 28 day currency requirements.

[heights good]

"The non aircrew VSO may well be an incredible leader of people (and I understand the argument in your article) but when you need to direct people into harms way in aircraft and make decisions and representations about what assets are required it will definitely help if you have some experience in the field of aviation."

Is that not the role of DCOM Ops?

[Foghorn Leghorn]

I do not have any specific examples and I’m not about to waste a single second trying to find any.

In fact my point about the ‘high level’ briefing was largely hypothetical as well in an attempt to illustrate a point. You seem to want to pick my ‘straw man’ argument to pieces so feel free. I won’t waste too much thought or energy countering you.

In broad terms the Chief of the Air Staff needs an extensive working knowledge of his/her assets. That comes from operating them. You don’t need to be a pilot and you don’t need to have flown every platform but the multitude of considerations and levels of knowledge that need to be possessed to understand the implications and capabilities of air power are extremely unlikely to come from an individual who has never flown.

The non aircrew VSO may well be an incredible leader of people (and I understand the argument in your article) but when you need to direct people into harms way in aircraft and make decisions and representations about what assets are required it will definitely help if you have some experience in the field of aviation.

This argument will basically fall on one of two sides. Those who think CAS should be aircrew (probably mostly consisting of aircrew) and those that think CAS need not be aircrew (probably mostly by those who are not aircrew).

If I’m honest I’m not sure I really care either way and BV’s opinion will not affect things one bit. I’ll call CAS Sir/Ma’am regardless and my life won’t really be affected much regardless of their branch.

BV

Come come BV. I know it would irk you, just as much as it would irk me, if the CAS wasn’t aircrew; I’m happy to say that. I suspect you can’t be bothered with more of AtG.... ;)

[ShyTorque]

Many years ago, a very pleasant senior non-aircrew type came to discuss his report and to ask about retention etc. One topic which cropped up was the (can't remember what it was called as I avoided it) month long course at Henlow which JOs who couldn't out run the Boss were often collared for. I suggested that it would be less disruptive if the course could be between tours as it would have less impact on currency.

"What's currency", he asked. He was genuinely thankful for the explanation as he had no knowledge of 28 day currency requirements.

Beagle, would that be OCC (Officers’ Command Course)? I didn’t run fast enough and got collared for that but declined to take the C exam so it was a waste of time.

I recall the name of one senior officer in charge of the flight safety magazine which we all thought was an April fool’s joke. He was an adminner named “I. R. Blunt”. If he was real, it’s a bummer of a name for someone placed in that position. :p

[Party Animal]

And back to the title of AFPRB 20 - does anyone have any knowledge (or best guess) of when we can expect the ‘Pension Calculator’ to be updated this year? Not sure what the typical annual lag has been to be honest?

[Timelord]

I have always thought that only aircrew get to see how all the other branches and trades contribute to the application of air power. Everyone makes their essential contribution and aircrew are exposed, to a greater or lesser extent , to all of their efforts but I doubt that , for example, a supplier has much appreciation of the work that air traffic control does or a rock that of an air battle manager.

[Door Slider]

And back to the title of AFPRB 20 - does anyone have any knowledge (or best guess) of when we can expect the ‘Pension Calculator’ to be updated this year? Not sure what the typical annual lag has been to be honest?

it was October last year