Flying Pay - to go????
I would assume (his) point is that (he) can't understand why people are concerned at the possibility of taking a large pay cut whilst at the same time being sent to a job they don't want to do.
I would also assume that (he) like the other posters on this thread who think it is a good idea aren't at threat from the cost-cutters this time.
I would also assume that (he) like the other posters on this thread who think it is a good idea aren't at threat from the cost-cutters this time.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: swindon
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
make me a blunty and I'll leave
If your extra pay is taken away whether it is an allowance or retentive pay, where are you all going to go, McDs only have limited numbers per intake.
I'm not too convinced that 'Virgin' is gagging for ex aircrew.
Perhaps a blunty tour would let you smell the coffee and see what stresses the rest of the team are under rather than bleating about how much cash you deserve.
Some of you seem to know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
I'm not too convinced that 'Virgin' is gagging for ex aircrew.
Perhaps a blunty tour would let you smell the coffee and see what stresses the rest of the team are under rather than bleating about how much cash you deserve.
Some of you seem to know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 1,360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SIU,
I guess from your posts around the threads that you have come unstuck during the selection process
Envy, whilst a common British trait, is no way to live your life
Get over it, move on and accept where you are on life's ladder........as by the sound of it you aint' going much further
all spelling mistakes are"df"alcohol induced
I guess from your posts around the threads that you have come unstuck during the selection process
Envy, whilst a common British trait, is no way to live your life
Get over it, move on and accept where you are on life's ladder........as by the sound of it you aint' going much further
all spelling mistakes are"df"alcohol induced
Cunning Artificer
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The spiritual home of DeHavilland
Age: 76
Posts: 3,127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whatever happened to the 'good old days' - when pilots on ground tours could keep their flying pay by trucking Air Cadets round the circuit in Chipmunks for a few hours every summer?
Sounds like the World's Best Flying Club isn't so much of a club anymore, eh? ...
Sounds like the World's Best Flying Club isn't so much of a club anymore, eh? ...
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: swindon
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm just trying yo sex things up with extreme views, although there is a valid core to many of the threads. You may be surprised that I was never interested in becoming aircrew despite testing positive at OASC, I guess it isn't everyones dream (Well not in my twisted dreams anyway).
I think the flying pay issue will be subsumed into the general review that I understand is going on into pay scales a'la pay 2000 in the ground trades. I have heard rumours of every branch making cases for additional allowances along the lines of:
Engineers - Responsibility for airworthiness.
Adminers - Responsibility for finance.
Suppliers - Responsibility for logistics.
I'm sure everyone could come up with reasons why they deserve more cash but the fact remains that aircrew get it and everyone else wants it.
The route to getting it is open to anyone with the skills and ability to get through selection and the lengthy training process so thre is actually little room for bleating. Despite my previous post.
I think the flying pay issue will be subsumed into the general review that I understand is going on into pay scales a'la pay 2000 in the ground trades. I have heard rumours of every branch making cases for additional allowances along the lines of:
Engineers - Responsibility for airworthiness.
Adminers - Responsibility for finance.
Suppliers - Responsibility for logistics.
I'm sure everyone could come up with reasons why they deserve more cash but the fact remains that aircrew get it and everyone else wants it.
The route to getting it is open to anyone with the skills and ability to get through selection and the lengthy training process so thre is actually little room for bleating. Despite my previous post.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The aircrew pay and retention issues need to be addressed as a whole. For example, why train so many people to operate so few aircraft? Get this right and retain them longer and the savings on training are significant.
On the issue of aircrew flying pay, why have such a system at all? Pay the aircrew a basic rate that is competitive and make the whole salary pensionable.
Retention could be improved by a bonding system requiring a number of years service to justify the initial training costs or a hefty financial penalty for early leavers. It is reasonable to expect the taxpayer to get a fair return on his investment and early leavers should pay back rather than taxpayers money being paid out in retention bonuses.
Aircrew who are selected for executive ground jobs should be offered a salary for the job that motivates them to leave the cockpit they love - if that means a rank to go with it, then give it to them - by definition they will need the rank to do the job. If the job is non-executive and needs aircrew expertise, first try to fill it at a ground level salary with those who can for various reasons no longer fly - if none are available then - and only then - fill it with current aircrew but leave their salary intact. At the earliest opportunity, replace them with the non-flier at ground salary rate.
No commercial organisation could afford the training and retention costs the taxpayer pays the military. It is time the MOD revised their profligate ways.
On the issue of aircrew flying pay, why have such a system at all? Pay the aircrew a basic rate that is competitive and make the whole salary pensionable.
Retention could be improved by a bonding system requiring a number of years service to justify the initial training costs or a hefty financial penalty for early leavers. It is reasonable to expect the taxpayer to get a fair return on his investment and early leavers should pay back rather than taxpayers money being paid out in retention bonuses.
Aircrew who are selected for executive ground jobs should be offered a salary for the job that motivates them to leave the cockpit they love - if that means a rank to go with it, then give it to them - by definition they will need the rank to do the job. If the job is non-executive and needs aircrew expertise, first try to fill it at a ground level salary with those who can for various reasons no longer fly - if none are available then - and only then - fill it with current aircrew but leave their salary intact. At the earliest opportunity, replace them with the non-flier at ground salary rate.
No commercial organisation could afford the training and retention costs the taxpayer pays the military. It is time the MOD revised their profligate ways.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 1,360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Soddim,
Nice thought but it will never happen...far to sensible
The only way ahead is via the PA spine initiative which removes flying pay but adds it to the basic pay. Just happened o me so my basic pay now is my total pay ........and is all pensionable...hooray
SIU........."You may be surprised that I was never interested in becoming aircrew despite testing positive at OASC, I guess it isn't everyones dream (Well not in my twisted dreams anyway)."..........yeah really
all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced
Nice thought but it will never happen...far to sensible
The only way ahead is via the PA spine initiative which removes flying pay but adds it to the basic pay. Just happened o me so my basic pay now is my total pay ........and is all pensionable...hooray
SIU........."You may be surprised that I was never interested in becoming aircrew despite testing positive at OASC, I guess it isn't everyones dream (Well not in my twisted dreams anyway)."..........yeah really
all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced
Sex it up - ..."You may be surprised that I was never interested in becoming aircrew despite testing positive at OASC, I guess it isn't everyones dream (Well not in my twisted dreams anyway)."
One is tempted to ask why, given what you say above, you were tested at OASC, apparently wasting peoples time and money, and taking up a slot somebody else more "interested" could have had?
One is tempted to ask why, given what you say above, you were tested at OASC, apparently wasting peoples time and money, and taking up a slot somebody else more "interested" could have had?
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Soddim,
Agree with your post, however, after removing the need for aircrew instructors, because all new aircrew will now serve for 30 years or more, hence no need to train new aircrew, what are all "those that can't" .... going to do???
Agree with your post, however, after removing the need for aircrew instructors, because all new aircrew will now serve for 30 years or more, hence no need to train new aircrew, what are all "those that can't" .... going to do???
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Lincs
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doesn't everyone who attends OASC sit the basic aircrew aptitude test? After all, it's just a chunk of computer time. Someone in the know please correct if this is not the case.
SBG
SBG
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,089
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whingeing Aircrew - it is you that needs to get a life. The grass is NOT always greener in civvy life as many of you will no doubt find out. If you want a job flying as truckies for the holiday trade then pick your airline carefully because they are not all clamouring for ex RAF aircrew. You will also find that you may have a lot more work and a lot more hours and your pension is far far different to what you are entitled now, whether or not FP is included. BTW I am not ex aircrew but just offering a viewpoint that may warn you of disappointment yet to come. Go to Rumours thread and seek opinions on pay and allowances from the civvy drivers if you need further confirmation.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good question, Yeller_Gait, they could not leave without repaying their training bond so they would just have to learn to do it well and join the rest of the front line in the Falklands, Iraq and wherever else our PM commits us to serve. Some, of course, would still teach but by then it will be a civilian contract anyway so they might have to do it in a blue suit and measure up to their civilian counterparts who are fired if they fall short.
Inter Arma Enim Silentius Lex Legis
Join Date: May 2000
Location: England
Posts: 733
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually WorkingHard the grass is a lot greener where I am now.
I am working less hours for more money per hour, drawing my RAF Pension and am in an excellent 2nd pension scheme.
There are lots of ex RAF folk in my pastures a new and no one regrets the switch!
BUT then I have turned my back on aviation!!
I am working less hours for more money per hour, drawing my RAF Pension and am in an excellent 2nd pension scheme.
There are lots of ex RAF folk in my pastures a new and no one regrets the switch!
BUT then I have turned my back on aviation!!
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GET RID OF FLYING PAY ............... Ah the old chestnut raises it's head once more. By all means get rid of it.................if you want to get rid of all of your experienced pilots.
How many times have we seen this one before ? Pay us considerably less than our civvy counterparts then people will surely leave to go and join the side where the grass is not necessarily greener .....but definitely richer. No problems as far as putting bums on seats is concerned though because there will always be people who want to fly military aircraft. But you can bet your bottom dollar they will only fly long enough to achieve the necessary amount of hours required to get a civvy ticket. Then they'll be gone. Its about time people realised that loyalty to the military is dying fast and we could talk about why until the cows come home,hell freezes over etc etc etc. Its a sad fact but people today are motivated by only one thing................................MONEY................ hence
Fiancial incentives, Retention bonuses etc ..........
Any spolling mistukes are due to the fact i aint got O level English !!
How many times have we seen this one before ? Pay us considerably less than our civvy counterparts then people will surely leave to go and join the side where the grass is not necessarily greener .....but definitely richer. No problems as far as putting bums on seats is concerned though because there will always be people who want to fly military aircraft. But you can bet your bottom dollar they will only fly long enough to achieve the necessary amount of hours required to get a civvy ticket. Then they'll be gone. Its about time people realised that loyalty to the military is dying fast and we could talk about why until the cows come home,hell freezes over etc etc etc. Its a sad fact but people today are motivated by only one thing................................MONEY................ hence
Fiancial incentives, Retention bonuses etc ..........
Any spolling mistukes are due to the fact i aint got O level English !!