RAF JPA Rollout
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Down 4 Reprogram,
Excellent post, thanks for that. Is that method the official way, the way JPAC advise whilst problems are still apparent or a fudge to get the money ?
Either way, I'll use it on Monday !!
Excellent post, thanks for that. Is that method the official way, the way JPAC advise whilst problems are still apparent or a fudge to get the money ?
Either way, I'll use it on Monday !!
Last edited by FFP; 7th May 2006 at 07:05.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Well North of London
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FFP, Hoots,
Thanks - I don't know of if there is an "official way" anymore, and I haven't wasted breath trying to contact JPAC as I've watched many others try and fail. However, the method has worked for a number of people here, at least it seems to get the approval of the allowances clerk who rubber-stamps the claim for payment by BACS. Until we get some sort of easily accessible user manual (not a daft eLearning package that only shows you how to claim a taxi fare to Whitehall) I'll stick with anything that works!
BluePeterBadge,
I know that people like you have been dropped in it just as much as us, and I take my hat off to the countless scribblies who are burning the midnight oil banging their heads against a brick wall to get things at least passably functional. However, personally I took SS's post to mean the software testers who are supposed to check the interfaces of new applications for bugs. There is always a danger when you use "HR professionals" rather than Jo Bloggs users in such cases because what the professionals consider straightforward and self-explanatory is just barking mad to you or me. Case in point (as has been mentioned by someone else I think) - the wonderful torch widget thingy. How easy is it to click on the torch, enter "%" as a search wildcard and then select an answer from a list of two possibles. I haven't seen any other good application that uses something as tortuous to say Yes or No.
D4R
Thanks - I don't know of if there is an "official way" anymore, and I haven't wasted breath trying to contact JPAC as I've watched many others try and fail. However, the method has worked for a number of people here, at least it seems to get the approval of the allowances clerk who rubber-stamps the claim for payment by BACS. Until we get some sort of easily accessible user manual (not a daft eLearning package that only shows you how to claim a taxi fare to Whitehall) I'll stick with anything that works!
BluePeterBadge,
I know that people like you have been dropped in it just as much as us, and I take my hat off to the countless scribblies who are burning the midnight oil banging their heads against a brick wall to get things at least passably functional. However, personally I took SS's post to mean the software testers who are supposed to check the interfaces of new applications for bugs. There is always a danger when you use "HR professionals" rather than Jo Bloggs users in such cases because what the professionals consider straightforward and self-explanatory is just barking mad to you or me. Case in point (as has been mentioned by someone else I think) - the wonderful torch widget thingy. How easy is it to click on the torch, enter "%" as a search wildcard and then select an answer from a list of two possibles. I haven't seen any other good application that uses something as tortuous to say Yes or No.
D4R
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Soon to be somewhere else...
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BluePeterBadge
So are you saying that no-one from the admin branch was involved in JPA at all? Was it all aircrew, engineers, ATC, suppliers, etc who did it the work on a replacement admin system? Stop abdicating responsibility. The admin branch is to blame - maybe not you personally or those at a lower level but still adminers. You at the sharp end in PSF (or whatever it is called now) happen to be the interface or the public face, so get on with it. Don't hide behind 'Its not my fault' and try providing answers. It's not the fault of the girl at the customer service desk at a supermarket or even the pax staff when an ac is delayed because of bad wx but they still take the flak.
Just take responsibility for your branch.
If JPA was designed and implemented by non-admin branches I apologise, but that would show what the RAF thinks of its admin staff by taking this change away from them.
So are you saying that no-one from the admin branch was involved in JPA at all? Was it all aircrew, engineers, ATC, suppliers, etc who did it the work on a replacement admin system? Stop abdicating responsibility. The admin branch is to blame - maybe not you personally or those at a lower level but still adminers. You at the sharp end in PSF (or whatever it is called now) happen to be the interface or the public face, so get on with it. Don't hide behind 'Its not my fault' and try providing answers. It's not the fault of the girl at the customer service desk at a supermarket or even the pax staff when an ac is delayed because of bad wx but they still take the flak.
Just take responsibility for your branch.
If JPA was designed and implemented by non-admin branches I apologise, but that would show what the RAF thinks of its admin staff by taking this change away from them.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 1,873
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Scapegoatisasolution
Grow up. The guys in Handbrake house at Station level have had as much input to JPA as as F/O Bloggs had to Typhoon Weapons (guns) requirements has had. It is pointless and divisive to screw these people over. They have been, and still are trying to make the best of a very bad job. If you feel the need to have a dig, then do so (and I shall support you all the way) at the nerd who signed it off as being fit for purpose when it is clearly only fit for a
wiping.
Grow up. The guys in Handbrake house at Station level have had as much input to JPA as as F/O Bloggs had to Typhoon Weapons (guns) requirements has had. It is pointless and divisive to screw these people over. They have been, and still are trying to make the best of a very bad job. If you feel the need to have a dig, then do so (and I shall support you all the way) at the nerd who signed it off as being fit for purpose when it is clearly only fit for a
wiping.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Please see my earlier post. JPA was trialled at a PURPLE base. JPA is JOINT. OK, maybe the RAF is the lead organisation. Maybe the Army is just along for the ride (as always 
). Whatever, it is a JOINT project.
If it was joint then it is unfair blaming PSF - yes it is still PSF just the name has changed for Services to Support.
). Whatever, it is a JOINT project.If it was joint then it is unfair blaming PSF - yes it is still PSF just the name has changed for Services to Support.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Soon to be somewhere else...
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PN,
If it still is PSF why did I have to send my receipts to 'Chf Clk, HR Flight'?
Kev Nurse/Kitbag,
Being told by the HR staff that JPA is not their fault and responsibility is utter bollox. If I was told to address admin enquiries to the JPAC or Air Cdre T at Worthy Down, why are they still employed on base in the HR Flt? This came from the person I have to send my receipts for audit. Should I send my receipts in future to the JPAC or Worthy Down? The answer is no I shouldn't because unit admin still exists and should be the point of contact.
Ringing the JPAC is a waste of time in both waiting for an answer and the answer you get from the Helpdesk personnel. Like HR Flt, these helpdesk personnel do not have the knowledge to be of any use - but why should we accept that? It is no good saying that it'll be OK in a few years or the staff will learn as you are messing with money and morale.
I accept the point that responsibility for JPA should only be a third for the light blue adminers as its purple. I also accept the point of venting our spleen at the person signing it off but who is that? Who is going to listen and get it fixed?
If it still is PSF why did I have to send my receipts to 'Chf Clk, HR Flight'?
Kev Nurse/Kitbag,
Being told by the HR staff that JPA is not their fault and responsibility is utter bollox. If I was told to address admin enquiries to the JPAC or Air Cdre T at Worthy Down, why are they still employed on base in the HR Flt? This came from the person I have to send my receipts for audit. Should I send my receipts in future to the JPAC or Worthy Down? The answer is no I shouldn't because unit admin still exists and should be the point of contact.
Ringing the JPAC is a waste of time in both waiting for an answer and the answer you get from the Helpdesk personnel. Like HR Flt, these helpdesk personnel do not have the knowledge to be of any use - but why should we accept that? It is no good saying that it'll be OK in a few years or the staff will learn as you are messing with money and morale.
I accept the point that responsibility for JPA should only be a third for the light blue adminers as its purple. I also accept the point of venting our spleen at the person signing it off but who is that? Who is going to listen and get it fixed?
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blue Peter Badge
Ah, the 'we don't like it either so it isn't our fault' line. Well, it is an ocean-going disaster and it would be interesting to know which branch the RAF personnel involved in this project were drawn from. Couldn't possibly suggest that it was the admin branch because that might imply that they didn't do their job properly.
Don't use 'we've f***ed up our own people's pay as well' as an excuse to try and make it seem all right - you've f***ed up everyone's.
SS
Ah, the 'we don't like it either so it isn't our fault' line. Well, it is an ocean-going disaster and it would be interesting to know which branch the RAF personnel involved in this project were drawn from. Couldn't possibly suggest that it was the admin branch because that might imply that they didn't do their job properly.
Don't use 'we've f***ed up our own people's pay as well' as an excuse to try and make it seem all right - you've f***ed up everyone's.
SS
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Originally Posted by ScapegoatisaSolution
PN,
If it still is PSF why did I have to send my receipts to 'Chf Clk, HR Flight'?
If it still is PSF why did I have to send my receipts to 'Chf Clk, HR Flight'?
Move Supply from Admin to Eng. Change Eng to Eng and Supply. Slip in Forward and Back (I Know what it really is). Rename in Logs etc.
Then for fun get rid of Admin Wg.
As a secret tea base in Lincolnshire they are now Base Support Wing. How about the handful of other stations? Can't remember what happened to PMS but, as I said earlier, PSF changed to PSF.
Silly to chanhe to HR as this might then mean being taken in to the civil service HRMS
So, is there a common set of names for the new EAW structure or are all the stations making it up on the fly?
Oh for the days when all the bomber stations had common telephone directories - some of these legacy numbers are still in use today - x301 x 302 for Ops, x437 for SOPO. x314 for photographic. MT was another common number as were the sequence for sqn 1, sqn 2 and sqn 2. Made life simple when moving between stations on postings of diversions. Now the guy who dreamt that up and implemented it deserved a medal. - Probably Broadhurst
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: gloucester
Age: 59
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slippery slappery, you sound like you know nothing and your last post proves it. The officer corps brought this bloody system to us not the pers admins - we are the ones who are losing 30% of our trade!!!!! How many times was the system tested in PSF - none!!! How many times did we see the system up and running before the 20 Mar 06 - none! One of our so called leaders who will probably get another medal for this, signed up to this not a pers admin - do not forget that!
So why did we take JPA - guess why so that they could save money - so that they could lower your allowances in one large swoop and so that we could take another step towards one force - JSP's say it all!!
JPA is supposed to give you guys out there the chance to do all your OWN admin - not so easy now is it? Do you think SAMA was any better when it first came in - NO! But adminers made it work - a bit like we are helping you out at the moment when to be honest we should be referring you to the civvies at the JPAC!
If you do not believe me ask for a list of the personnel at Worthy Down on the teams that brought in this system!!! How rank heavy?
Has someone f****d up your pay? We are working all the hours to try to rectify people's problems - I sometimes wonder why - Ask the people I have had to sack the same question!
So why did we take JPA - guess why so that they could save money - so that they could lower your allowances in one large swoop and so that we could take another step towards one force - JSP's say it all!!
JPA is supposed to give you guys out there the chance to do all your OWN admin - not so easy now is it? Do you think SAMA was any better when it first came in - NO! But adminers made it work - a bit like we are helping you out at the moment when to be honest we should be referring you to the civvies at the JPAC!
If you do not believe me ask for a list of the personnel at Worthy Down on the teams that brought in this system!!! How rank heavy?
Has someone f****d up your pay? We are working all the hours to try to rectify people's problems - I sometimes wonder why - Ask the people I have had to sack the same question!
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Huntingdon
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SlipperySlappery
Blue Peter Badge
Ah, the 'we don't like it either so it isn't our fault' line. Well, it is an ocean-going disaster ('AGREED') and it would be interesting to know which branch the RAF personnel involved in this project were drawn from. (I don't think even the planners of this project could have picked on any other branch....but there again!!) Couldn't possibly suggest that it was the admin branch because that might imply that they didn't do their job properly. (Are you that naive? do you really believe that the RAF Admin Branch decided it would be a good idea?...JPA is PURPLE... we are the poor sods who have been shafted by those on high again...remember Pay 2000 anyone?
Don't use 'we've f***ed up our own people's pay as well' as an excuse to try and make it seem all right - you've f***ed up everyone's. (The point I'm making is JPA does not distinguish between Aircrew, Admin, Techies; it has "f***ed up" (as you so eloquently put it) EVERYONE.
SS
Ah, the 'we don't like it either so it isn't our fault' line. Well, it is an ocean-going disaster ('AGREED') and it would be interesting to know which branch the RAF personnel involved in this project were drawn from. (I don't think even the planners of this project could have picked on any other branch....but there again!!) Couldn't possibly suggest that it was the admin branch because that might imply that they didn't do their job properly. (Are you that naive? do you really believe that the RAF Admin Branch decided it would be a good idea?...JPA is PURPLE... we are the poor sods who have been shafted by those on high again...remember Pay 2000 anyone?
Don't use 'we've f***ed up our own people's pay as well' as an excuse to try and make it seem all right - you've f***ed up everyone's. (The point I'm making is JPA does not distinguish between Aircrew, Admin, Techies; it has "f***ed up" (as you so eloquently put it) EVERYONE.
SS
Your apportioning of blame is both laughable and unnecessary; is every plane crash the aircrews fault because they are the ones who fly them? I don't think so.
Sure the Admin branch is involved, but if you managed to read any of the pre-introduction propaganda you would know that JPA is an 'off the shelf package'. EDS hold the contract (Passport office fame) and Oracle (System designers) provide technical backup.
There are whole rafts of people attempting to make this work (Civilian, Army, RN & RAF). You can line them all up and shoot them if you wish, although I really think you should align your guns on those who decided on turning this on before it was ready. A financial decision I do believe.
Thank you to Kitbag, Kev Nurse & Down 4 Reprogram for your comments.
For what it is worth 'JPA will eventually work EVENTUALLY', (because we are going to have to make it) but it isn't going to be anytime soon!
BPB
Last edited by BluePeterBadge; 7th May 2006 at 19:52.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SlipperySlappery
Blue Peter Badge
Ah, the 'we don't like it either so it isn't our fault' line. Well, it is an ocean-going disaster and it would be interesting to know which branch the RAF personnel involved in this project were drawn from. Couldn't possibly suggest that it was the admin branch because that might imply that they didn't do their job properly.
Don't use 'we've f***ed up our own people's pay as well' as an excuse to try and make it seem all right - you've f***ed up everyone's.
SS
Ah, the 'we don't like it either so it isn't our fault' line. Well, it is an ocean-going disaster and it would be interesting to know which branch the RAF personnel involved in this project were drawn from. Couldn't possibly suggest that it was the admin branch because that might imply that they didn't do their job properly.
Don't use 'we've f***ed up our own people's pay as well' as an excuse to try and make it seem all right - you've f***ed up everyone's.
SS
Although I'm as angry about the implementation of JPA as everyone else, I really do think that you should take a long (perhaps alcohol free) look at your post and think again.
I understand that local PSF/HR people have been working all hours over the last few weeks to try and sort out the mess that they have been dropped into through no fault of their own. Moreover, suspect that if it wasn't for them, none of us would have been paid at all this month!
Consider for a second how it must feel to see your job about to be replaced by a new system, and then to have to work all hours to bail out that system in order for it to have any chance of success. I'm sure they all saw the lack of attention apparently paid to any detail of the transition process by the IPT and EDS. Unfortunately, that's a recurrent theme throughout all of our procurement projects at the moment - and it has to stop!!!
Personally, I'd like to congratulate the local PSF/HR people for trying so hard on our behalf - it must be very tempting for them to just walk away from the problem.
On the other hand, I do hope that when the National Audit Office hold their investigation into this mess - and I'm sure that that will have to happen - they demand to see the JPA transition plan and risk assessments and ask the Senior Reporting Officer why he thought that JPA was ready for implementation on 1 Apr 06. Was it because JPA had been fully tested and found to be mature, secure and robust? Or was it because, from that date,
- SAMA and other existing contracts had not been renewed,
- staff cuts in local PSF/HR offices had to be made in order for the RAF to meet its promised manpower reductions
- new regulations for allowances/expenses had to be implemented in order to make savings?
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Huntingdon
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by LFFC
Personally, I'd like to congratulate the local PSF/HR people for trying so hard on our behalf (Thank you)- it must be very tempting for them to just walk away from the problem. (I tried - the redundo board said NO!)
Another post for the beleaguered PSF Staffs 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Huntingdon
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ScapegoatisaSolution
BluePeter,
Is there a way of logging our genuine concerns over money, security, loss of allowances, etc? Enough queries ref a particular problem may help with damage limitation as I fear so many incidents of the failing system are not being noticed.
Is there a way of logging our genuine concerns over money, security, loss of allowances, etc? Enough queries ref a particular problem may help with damage limitation as I fear so many incidents of the failing system are not being noticed.
The failings of the system are all being noticed but the shear volume is overwhelming.
For individual help, try approaching your unit PSF, we are all maxed out, but I'm sure your staff will help (if the JPA system will let them), but try reading the 'scrolling news' or FAQs on the Stn JPA website first. PSF staffs are all 'reading the on-line user guides' to find out how things are done, we certainly would not claim to be experts yet. As people find out the what/where and how the thing works the info is passed around.
As I stated in an earlier post the trainers only received the thing on the Friday prior to training proceeding on the following Monday. They did what they could in the time they had.
The JPAC staff pass out contradicting information, when and if you can get them to answer. Again lack of training/knowledge of the system.
So once again, I will agree with one and all 'It is a cluster' but we have to get on with it.
BPB
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
You should have seen how JPA was tested - 280 people, one site, 3 weeks. How long was the whole program in developement?
HRMS fell over because the pipe to its server was not big enough. Richard Hadfield, 2PUS, held his hand up and slowed the migration to HRMS in some areas by a few months. It started small and slowly builds up. Not perfect but it does seem to work.
MFMIS is running late on 'defered success' and missed its latest introduction date - training has not started AFAIK. At least it will come in in 2 phases although there will not be parallel runnng ALFENS will not be switched off
HRMS fell over because the pipe to its server was not big enough. Richard Hadfield, 2PUS, held his hand up and slowed the migration to HRMS in some areas by a few months. It started small and slowly builds up. Not perfect but it does seem to work.
MFMIS is running late on 'defered success' and missed its latest introduction date - training has not started AFAIK. At least it will come in in 2 phases although there will not be parallel runnng ALFENS will not be switched off
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Richard Hadfield, 2PUS, held his hand up and slowed the migration to HRMS in some areas by a few months. It started small and slowly builds up. Not perfect but it does seem to work.
How do you factor into this the cost of loss of morale, the loss of confidence in leadership etc etc..... I doubt if that was considered.....and all of this whilst we are fighting a war on 2 fronts!
Believe me, I'm always the first to embrace change, but it has to be properly planned!
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yawn!
Originally Posted by SlipperySlappery
Blue Peter Badge
Ah, the 'we don't like it either so it isn't our fault' line. Well, it is an ocean-going disaster and it would be interesting to know which branch the RAF personnel involved in this project were drawn from. Couldn't possibly suggest that it was the admin branch because that might imply that they didn't do their job properly.
Don't use 'we've f***ed up our own people's pay as well' as an excuse to try and make it seem all right - you've f***ed up everyone's.
SS
Ah, the 'we don't like it either so it isn't our fault' line. Well, it is an ocean-going disaster and it would be interesting to know which branch the RAF personnel involved in this project were drawn from. Couldn't possibly suggest that it was the admin branch because that might imply that they didn't do their job properly.
Don't use 'we've f***ed up our own people's pay as well' as an excuse to try and make it seem all right - you've f***ed up everyone's.
SS