3% Payrise for the Armed forces
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: troon
Age: 61
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
3% Payrise for the Armed forces
Taken from the Navy News website today....
The Royal Navy has been given a “thoroughly deserved” three per cent pay rise by the Government in a bid to bolster recruitment, retention and motivation.
Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon announced yesterday that the Government has agreed to implement the recommendations of the Armed Forces Pay Review Body (AFPRB), a nine-strong independent group which reports annually on the level of pay for sailors, soldiers and airmen.
The AFPRB recommended a three per cent increase in basic military salary for both officers and other ranks, with a similar increase in the rates of specialist pay – including Flying Pay, Submarine Pay, Diving Pay and Hydrographic Pay.
There is also to be a five per cent increase to rates of Longer Separated Service Allowance and Longer Service at Sea Bonus, which are intended to compensate for the separation of serving men and women from their families.
There will also be “graduated increases” in accommodation charges and an increase of 2.7 per cent in food charges.
In a summary of the body’s report, members note that they are encouraged by the upgrade programme of Service Family Accommodation, but are “more concerned that there have been cuts to the investment programme for improving Single Living Accommodation (SLA).”
The summary continues: “Almost half of al occupied SLA is of the lowest grade with all the inconvenience and discomfort that implies.
“There is a danger that these setbacks in the upgrade programme will undermine personnel’s confidence that their employer values them.
“We recommend tapered increases to accommodation charges, with no increase to the charges for the poorest-quality accommodation.”
The increases, which come into effect from April 1, will add an extra £216 million to the defence budget
Geoff Hoon said: “This pay increase is thoroughly deserved.
“It has been a challenging year for the Armed Forces and I continue to be impressed with their commitment and achievements.”
Speaking on behalf of the military, Chief of the Defence Staff General Sir Michael Walker said: “I am pleased that the Government has recognised the exceptional contribution that the Armed Forces make.”
In its deliberations, the AFPRB evaluates the comparisons between military jobs and civilian equivalents and takes evidence from a wide range of experts.
On this occasion, the review body visited 29 military establishments and discussed issues with more than 3,000 Service personnel and their families.
Ok 1st off I would NEVER take anything away from you Guy's and Girls out there on the front line I think you deserve every penny you get but I do have a couple of discussion points...
1/ How do you think this payrise is going to be funded? by more cuts, and if so what? as I dont think this gets voted through in the commons.
2/ Specialist pay - I know the Submariners are payed this even when ashore, the skimmers aren't, what about the Airy Fairies?
3/ Accomodation - Do you pay for this when at sea? I never did. But then again I was just a reservist.
4/ What factors are taken into account when the AFPRB make thier deiberations? i'll bet the increased risk of being Maimed/injured or killed isn't up for discussion
The Royal Navy has been given a “thoroughly deserved” three per cent pay rise by the Government in a bid to bolster recruitment, retention and motivation.
Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon announced yesterday that the Government has agreed to implement the recommendations of the Armed Forces Pay Review Body (AFPRB), a nine-strong independent group which reports annually on the level of pay for sailors, soldiers and airmen.
The AFPRB recommended a three per cent increase in basic military salary for both officers and other ranks, with a similar increase in the rates of specialist pay – including Flying Pay, Submarine Pay, Diving Pay and Hydrographic Pay.
There is also to be a five per cent increase to rates of Longer Separated Service Allowance and Longer Service at Sea Bonus, which are intended to compensate for the separation of serving men and women from their families.
There will also be “graduated increases” in accommodation charges and an increase of 2.7 per cent in food charges.
In a summary of the body’s report, members note that they are encouraged by the upgrade programme of Service Family Accommodation, but are “more concerned that there have been cuts to the investment programme for improving Single Living Accommodation (SLA).”
The summary continues: “Almost half of al occupied SLA is of the lowest grade with all the inconvenience and discomfort that implies.
“There is a danger that these setbacks in the upgrade programme will undermine personnel’s confidence that their employer values them.
“We recommend tapered increases to accommodation charges, with no increase to the charges for the poorest-quality accommodation.”
The increases, which come into effect from April 1, will add an extra £216 million to the defence budget
Geoff Hoon said: “This pay increase is thoroughly deserved.
“It has been a challenging year for the Armed Forces and I continue to be impressed with their commitment and achievements.”
Speaking on behalf of the military, Chief of the Defence Staff General Sir Michael Walker said: “I am pleased that the Government has recognised the exceptional contribution that the Armed Forces make.”
In its deliberations, the AFPRB evaluates the comparisons between military jobs and civilian equivalents and takes evidence from a wide range of experts.
On this occasion, the review body visited 29 military establishments and discussed issues with more than 3,000 Service personnel and their families.
Ok 1st off I would NEVER take anything away from you Guy's and Girls out there on the front line I think you deserve every penny you get but I do have a couple of discussion points...
1/ How do you think this payrise is going to be funded? by more cuts, and if so what? as I dont think this gets voted through in the commons.
2/ Specialist pay - I know the Submariners are payed this even when ashore, the skimmers aren't, what about the Airy Fairies?
3/ Accomodation - Do you pay for this when at sea? I never did. But then again I was just a reservist.
4/ What factors are taken into account when the AFPRB make thier deiberations? i'll bet the increased risk of being Maimed/injured or killed isn't up for discussion
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A bit of a rant, and a lot of analysis...
Await the attendent increases in food charges, accommodation charges, National Insurance contributions, family quarters rates.... Whatever Buff says, 3% is derisory. If we're working so hard, why do we continue to get a paltry pay rise that will be wiped out by increases in statutory reductions, same as we did before PTARMIGAN, FRESCO, TELIC, et al? I'll wait for Hoon to p**ss off forever before leaping with joy.
Speaking of which, given his rapturous welcome for our pay "rise", I wonder how much he'll be getting this year for sitting on his sanctimonious arse and decimating our armed "forces"? Prat.
So, how's about a little bit of analysis from someone who actually cares how much we're paid? All based on the AFPRB's report.
Precis of Chapter 4 (pg viii):
The RPI was HMT's primary method for determining economic rates until it adopted the EU's CPI in 2004. This index traditionally produces lower rates than the RPI, since it does not include the housing element which dominates the UK's consumer economy. In Jan 05 the RPI stood at 3%, whereas the CPI was at 1.5% - if the AFPRB had been consistent with HMG's statistical policy, it would have considered the CPI's catering and services basket, whose rate stood at 1.2% for much of last year.
Para 1.13 (pg 3/4):
Is this fair? The AFPRB has been influenced by HMG in that it has considered their economic targets for public sector pay, instead of taking into account the evidence provided and making an independent decision prior to referring their recommendations to Buffy. In addition to this, they have been advised to consider evidence with reference to the CPI for pay, yet they have considered the higher-rate RPI for charges! Where is the consistency? This is poor economics.
Para 1.14 (pg 4):
There is no context to alter this passage. Let's be clear about this: Project SLAM is failing. It is, in fact, almost completely devalued by the removal of 12,400 bed spaces, when the stated aim of the project is for ALL SLA-based personnel to live in high-grade en suite accommodation by 2013. And almost HALF of all occupied SLA is of the lowest grade. And they're still justifying an increase in accommodation charges across the board?
Paras 1.15 through 1.18: Briefly, these paras conclude that the Services' rates of pay and remuneration packages compare favourably with those of 10 other countries' armed forces. Apparently only Canada and France do better than the UK's Services. The 10 countries include the USA.
Who agrees that we are better-paid than the Americans? With the notable exception of the very lowest ranks, this is simply not true (for posterity, in the US private soldiers, junior ratings and junior airmen are in some states dependent upon Social Security payments to suppliment their meagre income - their accommodation and food are free, however, and of a higher quality than that which is provided to our most junior personnel). In fact, Britain is the only G7 country that makes its Armed Forces pay income tax on operational detachments. How about stopping this tax as a means of rewarding personnel actually engaged in operations? Oops - silly me. I forgot that our SofS is a spineless yes-man who cannot stand up to HMT and demand a better package for the Armed Forces.
Para 2.4 (pg 7):
So, the 'independent' AFPRB has been "told" by MOD that an award in excess of inflation would be undesirable due to its impact on funding of other areas. The AFPRB has been scuttled! Okay, so we do have a higher-than-inflation pay if you consider the RPI (inflation = 1.5%)... but aren't our charges based on the RPI? In that case, we have an on-inflation pay rise of 3%. An interesting economic sleight of hand. Noting the need to "achieve efficiencies of £2.8 billion", the question arises: why should efficiencies have anything to do with an 'independent' board? It should be up to MOD to work around the board's recommendations. How about reassigning some of the £2.8bn to the pay bill? And how does this compare with 'New' Labour's claim to be increasing the Defence budget? Well, let's see what Gordon "Jobless" Brown has to say on March 16.
Para 2.60 (pg 20):
Hm. So Buffy didn't ever want us to gain more than an inflationary pay-rise, presumably based on the CPI or RPIX (a differently-weighted version of the RPI, which discounts some of the RPI's elements - RPIX stood at 2.2% in November 2004). Do I detect an implied threat - and an economic loophole in the statement that, "any award in excess of inflation would have to be funded from savings elsewhere in the overall package for personnel"? What about the £2.8bn efficiency savings? Where are these coming from? Why is it acceptable to make these savings, yet the addition of more than £216m to the Defence budget is uncceptable? Also, consider the fact that a net reduction of 20,000 trained personnel by 2007-08 (the target FY for the efficiency savings) amounts to a more than 10% reduction in the trained strength of HMAF. Against this, why is 3% such a wonderful pay-rise when the Department could, in fact, afford more? Incidentally, I think a lot of soon-to-be-redundant personnel will be somewhat p***ed off at being included as "efficiency savings". The AFPRB could easily have recommended more - indeed, they probably would have done so - had it not been for sustained pressure from HMT to reduce the Department's spending.
Okay, I'm getting bored now. You get the point - the AFPRB's recommendations are unduly influenced by HMT's and Buffy's requirements and targets, and a lot of it is based on dodgy economics. It uses more than one price index (3, in fact, RPI, RPIX and CPI) to calculate awards and deductions, and it provides very little for the Armed Forces to be overly thankful for. Yes, it's a pay-rise, and it is welcome. But I think a lot of people will agree that it does NOT recognise the increased strain placed on the Services in the light of recent operations and - er - future commitments by fewer personnel.
Forgive any value judgments in my analysis, btw!
Speaking of which, given his rapturous welcome for our pay "rise", I wonder how much he'll be getting this year for sitting on his sanctimonious arse and decimating our armed "forces"? Prat.
So, how's about a little bit of analysis from someone who actually cares how much we're paid? All based on the AFPRB's report.
Precis of Chapter 4 (pg viii):
"We recommend tapered increases to accommodation charges, with no increase to the charges for the poorest quality accommodation,. We recommend a 2.7 per cent increase to food charges in line with the Catering grouping of the RPI, which reflects the costs involved in producing meals."
Para 1.13 (pg 3/4):
"The Government urged us to be guided by the Consumer Prices Index (CPI) target rate of 2 per cent alongside RPIX and other relevant factors including recruitment and retention and the need to be generally in step with other public sector pay awards."
Para 1.14 (pg 4):
"We are more concerned about failure to meet targets for the Single Living Accommodation (SLA) upgrade, particularly the removal of 12,400 bed spaces from the Project SLAM upgrade target for 2013. Almost half of all occupied SLA is of the lowest grade with all the inconvenience and discomfort that implies for personnel in what is essentially their home."
Paras 1.15 through 1.18: Briefly, these paras conclude that the Services' rates of pay and remuneration packages compare favourably with those of 10 other countries' armed forces. Apparently only Canada and France do better than the UK's Services. The 10 countries include the USA.
Who agrees that we are better-paid than the Americans? With the notable exception of the very lowest ranks, this is simply not true (for posterity, in the US private soldiers, junior ratings and junior airmen are in some states dependent upon Social Security payments to suppliment their meagre income - their accommodation and food are free, however, and of a higher quality than that which is provided to our most junior personnel). In fact, Britain is the only G7 country that makes its Armed Forces pay income tax on operational detachments. How about stopping this tax as a means of rewarding personnel actually engaged in operations? Oops - silly me. I forgot that our SofS is a spineless yes-man who cannot stand up to HMT and demand a better package for the Armed Forces.
Para 2.4 (pg 7):
"The Defence context for our deliberations emphasised the challenges facing the Services and the Ministry of Defence.... and budgetary pressures including the need for the Department to achieve efficiencies of £2.8 billion by 2007-08. Against this background, MOD told us that an award in excess of inflation would impact on the Department’s ability to fund other areas of the Defence budget."
Para 2.60 (pg 20):
"We are required by our terms of reference to have regard to the affordability of our recommendations. The Government’s evidence stressed the pressures on the Defence budget, including the need to make significant efficiency savings. The Secretary of State reinforced this in oral evidence. He reminded us that MOD had a “finite” budget and that any award in excess of inflation would have to be funded from savings elsewhere in the overall package for personnel. He was aware, however, as we are from our visits, that the level of the award sent a message to personnel about how they were valued by their employers."
Okay, I'm getting bored now. You get the point - the AFPRB's recommendations are unduly influenced by HMT's and Buffy's requirements and targets, and a lot of it is based on dodgy economics. It uses more than one price index (3, in fact, RPI, RPIX and CPI) to calculate awards and deductions, and it provides very little for the Armed Forces to be overly thankful for. Yes, it's a pay-rise, and it is welcome. But I think a lot of people will agree that it does NOT recognise the increased strain placed on the Services in the light of recent operations and - er - future commitments by fewer personnel.
Forgive any value judgments in my analysis, btw!
Last edited by tablet_eraser; 23rd Feb 2005 at 16:43.
Guest
Posts: n/a
1/ How do you think this payrise is going to be funded? by more cuts, and if so what? as I dont think this gets voted through in the commons.
2/ Specialist pay - I know the Submariners are payed this even when ashore, the skimmers aren't, what about the Airy Fairies?
3/ Accomodation - Do you pay for this when at sea? I never did. But then again I was just a reservist.
4/ What factors are taken into account when the AFPRB make thier deiberations? i'll bet the increased risk of being Maimed/injured or killed isn't up for discussion
1. It will be funded out of the defence budget.
2. Airy Fairies are paid SSP when ashore or afloat
3. No
4. The X factor.
2/ Specialist pay - I know the Submariners are payed this even when ashore, the skimmers aren't, what about the Airy Fairies?
3/ Accomodation - Do you pay for this when at sea? I never did. But then again I was just a reservist.
4/ What factors are taken into account when the AFPRB make thier deiberations? i'll bet the increased risk of being Maimed/injured or killed isn't up for discussion
1. It will be funded out of the defence budget.
2. Airy Fairies are paid SSP when ashore or afloat
3. No
4. The X factor.
Speaking of which, given his rapturous welcome for our pay "rise", I wonder how much he'll be getting this year
Or £3,650: up to £133,997.
No word in that news story on any change in allowances/expenses, however.
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 24
Posts: 6,487
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Accomodation - Do you pay for this when at sea? I never did. But then again I was just a reservist.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: troon
Age: 61
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
H3F
Thanks for the info. but on point 4 I think the X FActor was used to cover stuff such as overtime callout allowance etc that service personell dont get. i'd be very surprised if there was a mention of danger or harm within its written criteria!
Thanks for the info. but on point 4 I think the X FActor was used to cover stuff such as overtime callout allowance etc that service personell dont get. i'd be very surprised if there was a mention of danger or harm within its written criteria!
Or £3,650: up to £133,997.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Lincs
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Funny how the DHE failure to bring the SFQ estate up to scratch against their own timeframes is hidden away in the subtext....
Also the 22% increase in SFQ charges over 3 years.......
SBG
Also the 22% increase in SFQ charges over 3 years.......
SBG
Last edited by Spotting Bad Guys; 24th Feb 2005 at 12:22.
With RPI currently running at 3.4-3.5% a 3% pay rise looks to me like a pay cut - no matter what spin is put on it - on the basis that most people in the military these days do actually pay housing costs!! Nice to see how much our efforts are appreciated by a grateful government!
I notice in the report that the authors say that RPI is forecast to fall in the next year, so helping to justify only giving us 3% - I shall watch with interest.
There is one conspiracy theory that says the MoD are trying to piss people off, so that enough PVR to bring us down to the latest manning targets. In this way the targets are reached but redundancy payments are avoided! I wonder?
I notice in the report that the authors say that RPI is forecast to fall in the next year, so helping to justify only giving us 3% - I shall watch with interest.
There is one conspiracy theory that says the MoD are trying to piss people off, so that enough PVR to bring us down to the latest manning targets. In this way the targets are reached but redundancy payments are avoided! I wonder?
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Biggus, I see where you're coming from. In fact, it's even more insidious. The AFBRB only uses the high-rate RPI to determine reductions, but it uses the low-rate CPI to calculate inflation, ergo pay-rises. So, by using the CPI's 1.5% rate of inflation, they can claim that we have a payrise of 1.5% ABOVE inflation.
The CPI was adopted to help the Government "meet" its inflation target of 2%. It does not include the UK's housing market, which is the most dominant area concerning inflation here. So in fact, we have had bugger all, since the housing market continues to grow.
Bloody underhanded economics, pure and simple.
The CPI was adopted to help the Government "meet" its inflation target of 2%. It does not include the UK's housing market, which is the most dominant area concerning inflation here. So in fact, we have had bugger all, since the housing market continues to grow.
Bloody underhanded economics, pure and simple.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: SW England
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Althenick,
I think we have to accept that the X-factor covers everything. The 7 days a week, the no-overtime, the 1 hr notice-to-move, the cold, the heat, the wars.
Actually, I'm not cynical, just serving, that's what the job is.
IS
I think we have to accept that the X-factor covers everything. The 7 days a week, the no-overtime, the 1 hr notice-to-move, the cold, the heat, the wars.
Actually, I'm not cynical, just serving, that's what the job is.
IS
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: wilts
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At least we aren't the only ones to have been fcuked over by Bliars wise monkeys. Nurses have been given 3% as well, or so I am led to believe. Having just worked out the maths that is only £60 a month for all like me on the same payband. Take into account the rise in sfa rates and I may be looking at a cut in real terms.
How much are we going to get after Bliar insists we help Bush invade Iran?
How much are we going to get after Bliar insists we help Bush invade Iran?
Guest
Posts: n/a
How on earth do you believe we have been "fcuked over" when we have just received a 3% pay rise??? if you don't want the money then you could always give it to charity.
I fail to understand people who moan and groan when they have just received a pay rise...bizarre
VOTE LABOUR
I fail to understand people who moan and groan when they have just received a pay rise...bizarre
VOTE LABOUR
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems a reasonable deal, especially at a time when there are few recruitment and retention problems (AFPRB 2005 refers). The rise is around or above the current inflation rate (depending on which index you use), so I'm not sure what else we should expect.