2.6 %
Join Date: May 2007
Location: england
Age: 58
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it only me?
OF4/5/6s - all getting an average 8% pay rise, because they are all now doing more time away! Really!!
Am I being a little sensitive, but isn't this crap?
How many f------ OF4/5/6s are actually spending time away? More importantly, how many are in harms way?
Thoughts!
Am I being a little sensitive, but isn't this crap?
How many f------ OF4/5/6s are actually spending time away? More importantly, how many are in harms way?
Thoughts!
I am not an OF 4, 5 or 6 as I cannot count higher than 3, nor will I ever be able to but...I think most of them deserve every penny of the 8 %. HOWEVER, and an exceptionally big 'however', if this is true it is going to be massivly damaging to morale and difficult to square with everyone else only getting 3.5%. Very few OF4-6 will be affected by the SLA/FMQ rises and it will give the impression that the Brass are feathering their own nests, when in fact most OF4-6 had little or nothing to do with the AFPRB's recommendations; perhaps it is a cynical attempt by the Govt to drive another wedge into the military's cohesion. I fear a spectacular own goal about to appear on the score sheet.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trying to read between the usual management speak (I'm a bit thick) it seems that the equation between what a Wg Cdr (or equiv.) could earn outside and what he earns inside has been eroded. This is an attempt to redress the balance maybe? Or is it more likely that it's a carrot to keep all the Sqn Ldr/Major/Lt Cdrs interested for a little longer?
Still, these rises should be better targeted across the spectrum. We all know how many shiny wg cdr posts exist, you don't see many wg cdr eng posts in theatre do you?
Good to see that FRI is targeted at the junior ranks as well. At least it shows it's not just a badly targeted tool for keeping those aircrew mates who'd already decided to stay....
Overall, it's not brilliant, but we'd be naive in the extreme to think we were going to get any bigger settlement this year.
Can't quite get my head the x-factor increase, but my pay has definitely gone up by more than the headline percentage, even given an annual increment.
Still, these rises should be better targeted across the spectrum. We all know how many shiny wg cdr posts exist, you don't see many wg cdr eng posts in theatre do you?
Good to see that FRI is targeted at the junior ranks as well. At least it shows it's not just a badly targeted tool for keeping those aircrew mates who'd already decided to stay....
Overall, it's not brilliant, but we'd be naive in the extreme to think we were going to get any bigger settlement this year.
Can't quite get my head the x-factor increase, but my pay has definitely gone up by more than the headline percentage, even given an annual increment.
rudekid - apply the x factor rise to your pay first, then apply the 2.6% to that figure - then look at the difference which will be circa 3.5% from old to new.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,558
Likes: 0
Received 45 Likes
on
30 Posts
PAS Rates:
Go to the defence intranet page and click onto the pay rise article. Related documents on the RHS include the full PRB report for 2008. PAS rates are on page 60. (Not that I've looked at such a vulgar sum...)
Go to the defence intranet page and click onto the pay rise article. Related documents on the RHS include the full PRB report for 2008. PAS rates are on page 60. (Not that I've looked at such a vulgar sum...)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: wiltshire
Age: 58
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HHmmmm... now let me see, most of the AFPRB are made up from retired Cols , and a few legal type buddies etc, but I'm sure this had no bearing on their decision making process-if indeed there was any! Still mustn't grumble we did better than the teachers and plod!
Could have been better given everything we have to contend with. Equally, it could have been much much worse and even staged.
As it is, my fag packet calculations suggest that Melchett's rise is actually closer to 3.5% rather than 2.6%. It appears that the AFPRB have played things rather cleverly given extremely limited financial resources available. By first adjusting the X-factor by 1% and then implementing the 2.6% payrise on top of that revised figure means that we get more than the headline amount whilst Gordon manages to portray a reasonable level of restraint.
As it is, my fag packet calculations suggest that Melchett's rise is actually closer to 3.5% rather than 2.6%. It appears that the AFPRB have played things rather cleverly given extremely limited financial resources available. By first adjusting the X-factor by 1% and then implementing the 2.6% payrise on top of that revised figure means that we get more than the headline amount whilst Gordon manages to portray a reasonable level of restraint.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South Wales
Age: 63
Posts: 729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A good pay rise for you all and I am very pleased.
However I am not sure about the X factor rise.
My opinion (and this is only for the RAF) is that for the majority of members serving, life has not really changed in the last 20+ years. The majority of personnel only do an OOA once every 5-10 years and I still know quite a few people that have never done one.
More pay should go to those on continual ops, undermanned trades who are always on the go etc, etc.
Now I know some will say that is what separated service pay (whatever it is called these days) is for.
However, my experience is that somebody who is in the frame for lots of OOA’s are normally the same people working their nuts off at home as well.
Plus they are normally get shafted to pick up extra guard duties etc to make up for the time they were on Ops.
If things have changed in the last 12 months I stand to be corrected.
These are the people that should receive more.
Not your 8-5 (can’t be bothered because it is Friday afternoon) type people.
Why should they get an X Factor rise?
However I am not sure about the X factor rise.
My opinion (and this is only for the RAF) is that for the majority of members serving, life has not really changed in the last 20+ years. The majority of personnel only do an OOA once every 5-10 years and I still know quite a few people that have never done one.
More pay should go to those on continual ops, undermanned trades who are always on the go etc, etc.
Now I know some will say that is what separated service pay (whatever it is called these days) is for.
However, my experience is that somebody who is in the frame for lots of OOA’s are normally the same people working their nuts off at home as well.
Plus they are normally get shafted to pick up extra guard duties etc to make up for the time they were on Ops.
If things have changed in the last 12 months I stand to be corrected.
These are the people that should receive more.
Not your 8-5 (can’t be bothered because it is Friday afternoon) type people.
Why should they get an X Factor rise?
If, and I mean if because I don't know for sure, the X Factor is there to compensate for the operational side of our life is it not time to remove the X factor from the pay packets of those who seem always unfit to deploy. I'm not saying immediatly - play the same rules as applies with flying pay. After 12 months temp unfit or as soon as you are graded permanently unfit to deploy OOA then the X factor stops. May seem harsh but the days of carrying the fat, lame, and downright lazy are long gone.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: backofbeyond
Age: 52
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The X-Factor compensates for such things as, for example, being subject to military discipline, liability for duty at all times, the inability to resign at will, change jobs or negotiate pay, and the danger, turbulence and separation which are part of Service life." (Quoted from an Army website)
So the X-Factor is only partly designed to compensate for the danger and turbulence caused by ops. The Op Allowance and LSA are more specifically targetted towards those in Iraq/Afghanistan. Of course the only people who get the LSA/OA are those who are fit and willing for ops.
So the X-Factor is only partly designed to compensate for the danger and turbulence caused by ops. The Op Allowance and LSA are more specifically targetted towards those in Iraq/Afghanistan. Of course the only people who get the LSA/OA are those who are fit and willing for ops.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South Wales
Age: 63
Posts: 729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The X-Factor compensates for such things as, for example, being subject to military discipline, liability for duty at all times, the inability to resign at will, change jobs or negotiate pay, and the danger, turbulence and separation which are part of Service life." (Quoted from an Army website)
Liability for duty at all times – probably still exists but you might have to argue with the individual and you could end up in court.
The inability to resign at will – A lot of people allegedly taking that to court.
Change jobs or negotiate pay – well anything is possible these days.
Danger - agreed – no argument (for some)
Turbulence - not so sure. Number of people who get out of a posting because of wife/kids etc.
I think I stand by my earlier statement.
A good pay rise for you all and I am very pleased.
However I am not sure about the X factor rise.
My opinion (and this is only for the RAF) is that for the majority of members serving, life has not really changed in the last 20+ years. The majority of personnel only do an OOA once every 5-10 years and I still know quite a few people that have never done one. We don't all end up in the job we want, someone has to do those other jobs that don't always go away
More pay should go to those on continual ops, undermanned trades who are always on the go etc, etc.You canceled your own argument with the statement below
Now I know some will say that is what separated service pay (whatever it is called these days) is for.Look up the rate for someone who has done 4000 days away, this is where the people who go away more often are let down most badly
However, my experience is that somebody who is in the frame for lots of OOA’s are normally the same people working their nuts off at home as well. I used to think I was the only person who worked too, when I grew up I came to realise that there's a whole load more to achieving an operational mission than just the lineys and crew
Plus they are normally get shafted to pick up extra guard duties etc to make up for the time they were on Ops. Seems like bad management to me, nothing more or less than that!
If things have changed in the last 12 months I stand to be corrected.
These are the people that should receive more.I agree they should get more but it should be LSSA or whatever it's called this week, set those levels at at least twice the current rate and we'll be getting somewhere.
Not your 8-5 (can’t be bothered because it is Friday afternoon) type people.
Why should they get an X Factor rise?
However I am not sure about the X factor rise.
My opinion (and this is only for the RAF) is that for the majority of members serving, life has not really changed in the last 20+ years. The majority of personnel only do an OOA once every 5-10 years and I still know quite a few people that have never done one. We don't all end up in the job we want, someone has to do those other jobs that don't always go away
More pay should go to those on continual ops, undermanned trades who are always on the go etc, etc.You canceled your own argument with the statement below
Now I know some will say that is what separated service pay (whatever it is called these days) is for.Look up the rate for someone who has done 4000 days away, this is where the people who go away more often are let down most badly
However, my experience is that somebody who is in the frame for lots of OOA’s are normally the same people working their nuts off at home as well. I used to think I was the only person who worked too, when I grew up I came to realise that there's a whole load more to achieving an operational mission than just the lineys and crew
Plus they are normally get shafted to pick up extra guard duties etc to make up for the time they were on Ops. Seems like bad management to me, nothing more or less than that!
If things have changed in the last 12 months I stand to be corrected.
These are the people that should receive more.I agree they should get more but it should be LSSA or whatever it's called this week, set those levels at at least twice the current rate and we'll be getting somewhere.
Not your 8-5 (can’t be bothered because it is Friday afternoon) type people.
Why should they get an X Factor rise?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South Wales
Age: 63
Posts: 729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We don't all end up in the job we want, someone has to do those other jobs that don't always go away. Agreed but most of those in jobs that don’t go away are well happy. It is quite easy to get an exchange to a Sqn if you try hard.
Look up the rate for someone who has done 4000 days away, this is where the people who go away more often are let down most badly. Not sure what you mean – have you done 4000 days away?
I used to think I was the only person who worked too, when I grew up I came to realise that there's a whole load more to achieving an operational mission than just the lineys and crew. Agreed again, but it is a whole lot easier than being a Liney or crew – if not policy makers and office jobbers would all be applying to get back on Sqns. These days how many guys in engine bays/ ASFs or neat little posts at Wyton are trying to get back.
Seems like bad management to me, nothing more or less than that! True statement, but sadly true fact of life. You know the attitude from those that don’t do the duties – not their problem and they don’t really care.
I agree they should get more but it should be LSSA or whatever it's called this week, set those levels at at least twice the current rate and we'll be getting somewhere. 100% Agreed.
However in conclusion would you agree that just because they are subject to the same rules as everybody else, the ones that don’t want a hard career job, the ones that are quite happy to sit in a bay somewhere, the ones that will fight a posting because their wife has a professional career (when other wives don’t) the ones that will use their kids as an excuse not to be posted when others go with the flow, should get the same money as the few that do abide by the rules.
I will never forget the WO from Innsworth during a road show at RAF Bruggen:
When Bruggen was closing and loyal personnel were trying to get a decent posting of their choice, his attitude was “you wear a blue suit and we will post you anywhere”. The problem was he had been stationed at Innsworth for 15 years (along with many others around the country who could not be arsed to take up a posting elsewhere) with no ambition to move anywhere.
Hypocritical ****.
Look up the rate for someone who has done 4000 days away, this is where the people who go away more often are let down most badly. Not sure what you mean – have you done 4000 days away?
I used to think I was the only person who worked too, when I grew up I came to realise that there's a whole load more to achieving an operational mission than just the lineys and crew. Agreed again, but it is a whole lot easier than being a Liney or crew – if not policy makers and office jobbers would all be applying to get back on Sqns. These days how many guys in engine bays/ ASFs or neat little posts at Wyton are trying to get back.
Seems like bad management to me, nothing more or less than that! True statement, but sadly true fact of life. You know the attitude from those that don’t do the duties – not their problem and they don’t really care.
I agree they should get more but it should be LSSA or whatever it's called this week, set those levels at at least twice the current rate and we'll be getting somewhere. 100% Agreed.
However in conclusion would you agree that just because they are subject to the same rules as everybody else, the ones that don’t want a hard career job, the ones that are quite happy to sit in a bay somewhere, the ones that will fight a posting because their wife has a professional career (when other wives don’t) the ones that will use their kids as an excuse not to be posted when others go with the flow, should get the same money as the few that do abide by the rules.
I will never forget the WO from Innsworth during a road show at RAF Bruggen:
When Bruggen was closing and loyal personnel were trying to get a decent posting of their choice, his attitude was “you wear a blue suit and we will post you anywhere”. The problem was he had been stationed at Innsworth for 15 years (along with many others around the country who could not be arsed to take up a posting elsewhere) with no ambition to move anywhere.
Hypocritical ****.
My opinion (and this is only for the RAF) is that for the majority of members serving, life has not really changed in the last 20+ years. The majority of personnel only do an OOA once every 5-10 years and I still know quite a few people that have never done one.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South Wales
Age: 63
Posts: 729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aynayda Pizaqvick
Sorry mate, did not mean to upset you, but I think you missed my point.
I agree that there are quite a few that are on continual ops, particularly in the SH world. I know many lads/lasses that spend 6-9 months of the year away and have been doing so since the mid nineties (I was one of them).
The point that I was trying to make is that the majority of personnel in the RAF (and believe me there is an Air Force outside of the SH world) are still in sleepy 8-5 jobs and they have been there for many, many years. Why should they get the same benefits as those who are working their nuts off?
PS. I am out now (only just). And like so many who post here on Pprune, I left because I realised that you can work your balls off, show total loyalty and dedication and get very little reward for your efforts.
Sorry mate, did not mean to upset you, but I think you missed my point.
I agree that there are quite a few that are on continual ops, particularly in the SH world. I know many lads/lasses that spend 6-9 months of the year away and have been doing so since the mid nineties (I was one of them).
The point that I was trying to make is that the majority of personnel in the RAF (and believe me there is an Air Force outside of the SH world) are still in sleepy 8-5 jobs and they have been there for many, many years. Why should they get the same benefits as those who are working their nuts off?
PS. I am out now (only just). And like so many who post here on Pprune, I left because I realised that you can work your balls off, show total loyalty and dedication and get very little reward for your efforts.