Ministry of Defence officials paid £47 million in bonuses
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ministry of Defence officials paid £47 million in bonuses
Ministry of Defence officials paid £47 million in bonuses
Civil servants at the Ministry of Defence have been paid £47 million in performance bonuses this year, it can be disclosed.
Ministry of Defence officials paid £47 million in bonuses - Telegraph
By Rebecca Lefort and James Kirkup
Published: 10:00PM GMT 11 Nov 2009
A total of 232 British service personnel have been killed in Afghanistan since 2001
The figure, which covers just the first seven months of the current financial year, has been revealed as the Government faces charges of failing to provide British troops with adequate support and equipment on the front line in Afghanistan.
Additional bonus payments for the rest of year could take the total above the £53 million paid out to MoD officials in 2008/09.
There are 85,000 civil servants at the MoD, one for every two active troops. Around 50,000 of them will get a performance bonus this year.
The MoD has claimed that the bonuses would average less than £1,000, but some officials will get much bigger payments.
Last year, the department had senior 95 employees who were paid salaries of more than £100,000; and the average bonus for a senior civil servant in the department was £8,000.
An Army private can be paid as little as £16,681, with a £2,380 bonus for serving in Afghanistan.
The disclosures come as British troops are dying in Afghanistan at a rate not seen since the Falklands war, and polls show voters are turning against the mission.
A total of 232 British service personnel have been killed in Afghanistan since 2001. Commanders have said that some of those deaths could have been averted if there had been more helicopters available to British forces.
The MoD says that bonuses are paid to officials for exceptional performance, yet the department has faced repeated criticism over its mismanagement of major defence projects and its failure to deliver enough helicopters to Afghanistan.
The bonus payments have risen sharply even as MoD’s record has come in for growing criticism. In 2003/04, total bonus payments were £24.9 million.
The £47 million paid out so far this year would be pay for 47,000 sets of body armour, 26,111 SA80 A2 assault rifles or 156 Ridgeback armoured vehicles which help protect troops against roadside bombs.
Last night, as Gordon Brown continues to face intense pressure over his treatment of the Armed Forces. the bonus figures drew criticism of the Government.
The figures were revealed in the Commons following questions from Liam Fox, the Conservative shadow defence secretary, who said the bonus payments would anger service personnel.
"Many in the Armed Forces will be aghast that bonuses are being paid on the basis of outstanding performance," Dr Fox said. "This will only increase the view that the Armed Forces and the MoD administration are hugely out of balance."
Ministers awarded the Armed Forces a 2.8 per cent pay rise this year, meaning a private soldier is now paid between £16,681 and £25,887.
Soldiers deployed to Afghanistan receive a tax-free “operational allowance” worth £2,380 and a Longer Separation Allowance worth at least £1,194. The MoD says that means a private soldier deploying on his first operation is paid at least £20,255.
Earlier this year, The Daily Telegraph revealed that Britain has more military bureaucrats for every active serviceman than any of its allies.
Ministers have promised to cut the number of officials at the MoD head office by a quarter. The Conservatives say they will reduce MoD bureaucracy by a third.
Last month, an MoD review of defence procurement found that the department has overspent its equipment budget by £35 billion yet is still putting British troops on the frontline at risk by failing to provide the right kit
And earlier this month an independent inquiry found that years of incompentence and cost-cutting by MoD officials had contributed to the crash of an RAF Nimrod in Afghanistan in 2006, killing 14 British service personnel.
Earlier this week, Mr Brown was confronted by Jacqui Janes, whose son Jamie Janes died in Afghanistan last month. Mrs Janes told the Prime Minister that her son died because there was no helicopter available to take him to a field hospital. Mr Brown has promised a full investigation into the incident.
The widow of an RAF serviceman killed in Afghanistan last night criticised the Government over the equipment available to the troops. At the end of an inquest into the death of Senior Aircraftman Gary Thompson, 51, his widow Jacqui Thompson said British forces in Afghanistan are having to cope with “limited resources".
Reg Keys whose son, Lance Corporal Tom Keys, was once of six Royal Military Police killed in Iraq in June 2003, also criticised the MoD bonus awards.
He said: "They are trying to run the Armed Forces on a shoestring, but still pay their own employees huge bonuses."
Col Bob Stewart, the former commander of United Nations forces in Bosnia, said: “I am absolutely staggered. No civil servant should be getting any kind of a bonus when our country is broke and our troops are fighting for their lives.”
An MOD spokesman said: “These pay awards are met from within salary budget and have no impact on the operational or equipment budget. The awards were given to around 50,000 civil servants resulting in an average payment of less than £1,000.
“The vast majority of these awards were paid in August as part of previously agreed pay deals, so we are not expecting this year's total to increase significantly.”
Britain has 9,000 troops in Afghanistan, and Mr Brown has authorised the deployment of another 500.
President Barack Obama is also considering a military request for another 40,000 US troops. The request was made in September, and the president’s delay has caused frustration in the British government.
In the House of Commons yesterday, Mr Brown said that Mr Obama would make an announcement on troops “in the next few days.”
But the White House insisted that the decision is still "weeks and not days" away.
Civil servants at the Ministry of Defence have been paid £47 million in performance bonuses this year, it can be disclosed.
Ministry of Defence officials paid £47 million in bonuses - Telegraph
By Rebecca Lefort and James Kirkup
Published: 10:00PM GMT 11 Nov 2009
A total of 232 British service personnel have been killed in Afghanistan since 2001
The figure, which covers just the first seven months of the current financial year, has been revealed as the Government faces charges of failing to provide British troops with adequate support and equipment on the front line in Afghanistan.
Additional bonus payments for the rest of year could take the total above the £53 million paid out to MoD officials in 2008/09.
There are 85,000 civil servants at the MoD, one for every two active troops. Around 50,000 of them will get a performance bonus this year.
The MoD has claimed that the bonuses would average less than £1,000, but some officials will get much bigger payments.
Last year, the department had senior 95 employees who were paid salaries of more than £100,000; and the average bonus for a senior civil servant in the department was £8,000.
An Army private can be paid as little as £16,681, with a £2,380 bonus for serving in Afghanistan.
The disclosures come as British troops are dying in Afghanistan at a rate not seen since the Falklands war, and polls show voters are turning against the mission.
A total of 232 British service personnel have been killed in Afghanistan since 2001. Commanders have said that some of those deaths could have been averted if there had been more helicopters available to British forces.
The MoD says that bonuses are paid to officials for exceptional performance, yet the department has faced repeated criticism over its mismanagement of major defence projects and its failure to deliver enough helicopters to Afghanistan.
The bonus payments have risen sharply even as MoD’s record has come in for growing criticism. In 2003/04, total bonus payments were £24.9 million.
The £47 million paid out so far this year would be pay for 47,000 sets of body armour, 26,111 SA80 A2 assault rifles or 156 Ridgeback armoured vehicles which help protect troops against roadside bombs.
Last night, as Gordon Brown continues to face intense pressure over his treatment of the Armed Forces. the bonus figures drew criticism of the Government.
The figures were revealed in the Commons following questions from Liam Fox, the Conservative shadow defence secretary, who said the bonus payments would anger service personnel.
"Many in the Armed Forces will be aghast that bonuses are being paid on the basis of outstanding performance," Dr Fox said. "This will only increase the view that the Armed Forces and the MoD administration are hugely out of balance."
Ministers awarded the Armed Forces a 2.8 per cent pay rise this year, meaning a private soldier is now paid between £16,681 and £25,887.
Soldiers deployed to Afghanistan receive a tax-free “operational allowance” worth £2,380 and a Longer Separation Allowance worth at least £1,194. The MoD says that means a private soldier deploying on his first operation is paid at least £20,255.
Earlier this year, The Daily Telegraph revealed that Britain has more military bureaucrats for every active serviceman than any of its allies.
Ministers have promised to cut the number of officials at the MoD head office by a quarter. The Conservatives say they will reduce MoD bureaucracy by a third.
Last month, an MoD review of defence procurement found that the department has overspent its equipment budget by £35 billion yet is still putting British troops on the frontline at risk by failing to provide the right kit
And earlier this month an independent inquiry found that years of incompentence and cost-cutting by MoD officials had contributed to the crash of an RAF Nimrod in Afghanistan in 2006, killing 14 British service personnel.
Earlier this week, Mr Brown was confronted by Jacqui Janes, whose son Jamie Janes died in Afghanistan last month. Mrs Janes told the Prime Minister that her son died because there was no helicopter available to take him to a field hospital. Mr Brown has promised a full investigation into the incident.
The widow of an RAF serviceman killed in Afghanistan last night criticised the Government over the equipment available to the troops. At the end of an inquest into the death of Senior Aircraftman Gary Thompson, 51, his widow Jacqui Thompson said British forces in Afghanistan are having to cope with “limited resources".
Reg Keys whose son, Lance Corporal Tom Keys, was once of six Royal Military Police killed in Iraq in June 2003, also criticised the MoD bonus awards.
He said: "They are trying to run the Armed Forces on a shoestring, but still pay their own employees huge bonuses."
Col Bob Stewart, the former commander of United Nations forces in Bosnia, said: “I am absolutely staggered. No civil servant should be getting any kind of a bonus when our country is broke and our troops are fighting for their lives.”
An MOD spokesman said: “These pay awards are met from within salary budget and have no impact on the operational or equipment budget. The awards were given to around 50,000 civil servants resulting in an average payment of less than £1,000.
“The vast majority of these awards were paid in August as part of previously agreed pay deals, so we are not expecting this year's total to increase significantly.”
Britain has 9,000 troops in Afghanistan, and Mr Brown has authorised the deployment of another 500.
President Barack Obama is also considering a military request for another 40,000 US troops. The request was made in September, and the president’s delay has caused frustration in the British government.
In the House of Commons yesterday, Mr Brown said that Mr Obama would make an announcement on troops “in the next few days.”
But the White House insisted that the decision is still "weeks and not days" away.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Aylesbury
Age: 58
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come on guys... you're not really surprised are you?
They definately got them in DSDA; this year and last year.
And er... lets just say if those performances warranted bonuses.... I should have charged more on my day rate.
They definately got them in DSDA; this year and last year.
And er... lets just say if those performances warranted bonuses.... I should have charged more on my day rate.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Lincoln
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What the Telegraph so conveniently 'forgets' is that the Civil Service pay is now split into two parts.
1. A pay increase, which is pensionable
2. A non-consolidated lump sum payment AKA a 'bonus'
Try reading the comments on the Guardian article:
Families of war dead criticise bonus payments for MoD staff | Politics | The Guardian
1. A pay increase, which is pensionable
2. A non-consolidated lump sum payment AKA a 'bonus'
Try reading the comments on the Guardian article:
Families of war dead criticise bonus payments for MoD staff | Politics | The Guardian
Pumpkinjuice
12 Nov 2009, 5:00AM
I'm a civil servant.
This is how civil service "bonuses" work:
Until a few years ago, any pay rise was dependent on performance. The better you did, the higher your pay would rise.
Then some bright civil servant realised that loads of money could be saved by turning the performance related payrises into non consolidated bonuses, meaning that they would not count towards pensions, meaning that the tax payer has less of a pension burden over many years to come.
So now, unless you are not up to scratch (in which case you get no payrise) we all get the same basic payrise, which for most civil servants increases their salary by just a three figure sum each year.
The bonuses are just a replacement for performance related payrises and they meant to motivate staff.
Despite some people's opinion a great many of us do take pride in doing our jobs well. But you can imagine how motivated we would feel when we've busted a gut to acheive and there was no recogition of this, simply the same basic pay rise as the plodder sitting next to you, who does his job to the letter but no more.
It's not the same culture as in banks etc where I believe that large performance related salary rises are the norm for achievers as well as bonuses.
12 Nov 2009, 5:00AM
I'm a civil servant.
This is how civil service "bonuses" work:
Until a few years ago, any pay rise was dependent on performance. The better you did, the higher your pay would rise.
Then some bright civil servant realised that loads of money could be saved by turning the performance related payrises into non consolidated bonuses, meaning that they would not count towards pensions, meaning that the tax payer has less of a pension burden over many years to come.
So now, unless you are not up to scratch (in which case you get no payrise) we all get the same basic payrise, which for most civil servants increases their salary by just a three figure sum each year.
The bonuses are just a replacement for performance related payrises and they meant to motivate staff.
Despite some people's opinion a great many of us do take pride in doing our jobs well. But you can imagine how motivated we would feel when we've busted a gut to acheive and there was no recogition of this, simply the same basic pay rise as the plodder sitting next to you, who does his job to the letter but no more.
It's not the same culture as in banks etc where I believe that large performance related salary rises are the norm for achievers as well as bonuses.
Non Story.
This bonus scheme was a savings measure designed to (a) reduce overall pay bill and (b) reduce pension commitments as the bonus is not consolidated.
Most CS hate it.
This bonus scheme was a savings measure designed to (a) reduce overall pay bill and (b) reduce pension commitments as the bonus is not consolidated.
Most CS hate it.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 659
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree.
Total non story really, civil servants, easy target. I feel really sorry for some of them actually, just like the military most are good guys trying to do a good job, but, again just like the military, there are some who ought really be given their marching orders. The civils I have been working with recently dislike the bonus scheme intensely.
Bigger question is why the MOD has people dealing with mega million pound projects, with associated responsibilities, who are still being paid peanuts compared to their industry (and sometimes military) contempories.
Comparing terms of employment/service of military and MOD civil servants is utterly ridiculous. You don't hear the police or fire brigade constantly bleating about home office CS terms & conditions.
As I said, we (well some) mil folks like to attack them because they are such an easy target.
Total non story really, civil servants, easy target. I feel really sorry for some of them actually, just like the military most are good guys trying to do a good job, but, again just like the military, there are some who ought really be given their marching orders. The civils I have been working with recently dislike the bonus scheme intensely.
Bigger question is why the MOD has people dealing with mega million pound projects, with associated responsibilities, who are still being paid peanuts compared to their industry (and sometimes military) contempories.
Comparing terms of employment/service of military and MOD civil servants is utterly ridiculous. You don't hear the police or fire brigade constantly bleating about home office CS terms & conditions.
As I said, we (well some) mil folks like to attack them because they are such an easy target.
As stated.
Driven by HM Treasury under a certain G Brown as a cost saving measure. Majority of civil servants hate it, because as stated, its non-consolodated, and replaced the old pay rises based on how well you/your department did. So as others have stated, it reduced the overall civil service pay bill, for it's non-consolodated and non-pensionable, but it has made good tabloid fodder and yet again set the civil service up as a popular political target. So pay will be cut again, civil servants will be more hacked off, so the service they provide to where it matters will be hit.
Driven by HM Treasury under a certain G Brown as a cost saving measure. Majority of civil servants hate it, because as stated, its non-consolodated, and replaced the old pay rises based on how well you/your department did. So as others have stated, it reduced the overall civil service pay bill, for it's non-consolodated and non-pensionable, but it has made good tabloid fodder and yet again set the civil service up as a popular political target. So pay will be cut again, civil servants will be more hacked off, so the service they provide to where it matters will be hit.
Based on my own experience, I can only endorse most of what has been said above. I was a technical grade D M.O.D. Civil Servant for 7 years. My annual report was compiled by senior RAF officers and each year I received an enhanced bonus amounting to a non consolidated, but taxed £1200 gross. That still gave me less than £25000 pa. Two years ago I accepted an industry job doing exactly the same thing and my pay increased by over 60%. I don't know about the upper echelons but there are a lot of good guys at the coal face who rely on their bonus to boost a meagre wage. A lot would like to move on but domestic and geographic commitments prevent it.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Slightly left of centreline
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What about the extras that we get?
The Oberon sums it up nicely. Equivalent CS pay scales are lower than their military counterparts. Many CS posts are taken by retired military personnel who have a fairly balanced view of how the system works, but as usual, there is always a big stick somewhere who seeks to stir up the hornets.
I objected to the bonus scheme when I was in the CS, it was divisive and often unfair in the way it was awarded.
Gentleman Aviator
When I heard this news driving to work this morning, one of my first thoughts was: I hope pprune is sensible about it - and I'm pleased to see that they have been generally.
The Oberon has it entirely right, and he was fortunate enough to get an "enhanced" (ie - much better than most) bonus.
I've got a number of MoD CS working for me at the moment, and the rates of pay and bonuses are even worse if you consider the "troops" rather than the "officers".
Let's take Registry Staff as an example - very often CS and very rarely retired military - so no other income.
Registry Clerk (Grade E2) = SAC/Cpl? £14,726 - £17,584 (London rates £15,757 - £18,815) Standard bonus (if awarded) £360 - taxed!
I/C Registry (Grade E1) = Cpl/Sgt? £16,812 - £17,584 (London rates £17,465 - £21,479) Standard bonus (if awarded) £390 - taxed!
I don't know offhand what the median ages for the grades are, but they ain't all spotty youths.
Anyone fancy trying to live in the Smoke on £16K.........
And as Raven says, no HTD, medical, dental etc etc ....
The Oberon has it entirely right, and he was fortunate enough to get an "enhanced" (ie - much better than most) bonus.
I've got a number of MoD CS working for me at the moment, and the rates of pay and bonuses are even worse if you consider the "troops" rather than the "officers".
Let's take Registry Staff as an example - very often CS and very rarely retired military - so no other income.
Registry Clerk (Grade E2) = SAC/Cpl? £14,726 - £17,584 (London rates £15,757 - £18,815) Standard bonus (if awarded) £360 - taxed!
I/C Registry (Grade E1) = Cpl/Sgt? £16,812 - £17,584 (London rates £17,465 - £21,479) Standard bonus (if awarded) £390 - taxed!
I don't know offhand what the median ages for the grades are, but they ain't all spotty youths.
Anyone fancy trying to live in the Smoke on £16K.........
And as Raven says, no HTD, medical, dental etc etc ....
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I heard this news driving to work this morning, one of my first thoughts was: I hope PPRuNe is sensible about it - and I'm pleased to see that they have been generally.
At SO2 level my pay was eclipsed by an SAC who was rebanded a couple of years ago, but I expect we typically earn less than a Cpl.
The bonus scheme was forced upon the workforce for the reasons already stated, is devisive, and in reality brings little benefit. I have yet to see more than a basic bonus, £535 before tax.
Like teeteringhead, I truly wonder at how the E grades afford to live, particularly the ones in London, on the meagre wage that they bring in.
Having heard the story on R4 this morning, I must admit to being a bit put out about it, but over a cup of coffee, had a re-think. Thinking how little the civilian elements of the MOD get paid, frankly they deserve any bit extra they get, especially for those having to deal with London prices.
What strikes me a few hours on from the story is that this is yet another example of poor comms by MOD. My very experienced bosses repeatedly bang on about the importance of comms, labouring the point that often it is not what is actually said, but what is perceived to have been said.
In this case, given the months and years of stories about kit shortages, troops getting paid less than traffic wardens etc, I think the big problem with MOD CS getting bonuses is not that they get them, but how this message has been put across. It was always going to be a gift to headline writers if not handled properly in a manner that is difficult to spin / mis-interpret (separate budgets for kit, salaries etc), and that is exactly what seems to have happened. Half the story has been allowed to be published, which is now whipping up a storm.
What strikes me a few hours on from the story is that this is yet another example of poor comms by MOD. My very experienced bosses repeatedly bang on about the importance of comms, labouring the point that often it is not what is actually said, but what is perceived to have been said.
In this case, given the months and years of stories about kit shortages, troops getting paid less than traffic wardens etc, I think the big problem with MOD CS getting bonuses is not that they get them, but how this message has been put across. It was always going to be a gift to headline writers if not handled properly in a manner that is difficult to spin / mis-interpret (separate budgets for kit, salaries etc), and that is exactly what seems to have happened. Half the story has been allowed to be published, which is now whipping up a storm.
I come from a world where we too get bonuses, and am therefore not too disenchanted with the basic concept.
However the bonuses are paid depending on how much revenue has been generated, on the quite reasonable principle that you only pay it out if you earned it/got it in, in the first place. Basc salary is fixed, but bonus depends on how much money you actually got in to the company. None of us here can see how this could apply to a Civil Service position.
Furthermore, if you tie it to wider performance, then fiascos like the Chinooks standing idle for most of their lifespan due to basic procurement blunders would mean no performance-related bonuses at all.
We feel it is also disingenuous to give a figure averaged across all staff, for there will be some significant higher officers, like those who presided over the whole Chinook thing, who will be receiving very substantial bonus amounts, apparently to "keep parity with the private sector" as I saw it justified today. Would this be the same private sector who can no longer afford final salary non-contributory pensions like the civil service get ? The same private sector who, with management of this calibre, would have them out on their ear in months ?
For the real troops, I understand there is an Afghan bonus. But what about those in the UK, or in the Navy who are currently uninvolved ? Do they get nothing but the Whitehall pen-pushers get rewarded ?
However the bonuses are paid depending on how much revenue has been generated, on the quite reasonable principle that you only pay it out if you earned it/got it in, in the first place. Basc salary is fixed, but bonus depends on how much money you actually got in to the company. None of us here can see how this could apply to a Civil Service position.
Furthermore, if you tie it to wider performance, then fiascos like the Chinooks standing idle for most of their lifespan due to basic procurement blunders would mean no performance-related bonuses at all.
We feel it is also disingenuous to give a figure averaged across all staff, for there will be some significant higher officers, like those who presided over the whole Chinook thing, who will be receiving very substantial bonus amounts, apparently to "keep parity with the private sector" as I saw it justified today. Would this be the same private sector who can no longer afford final salary non-contributory pensions like the civil service get ? The same private sector who, with management of this calibre, would have them out on their ear in months ?
For the real troops, I understand there is an Afghan bonus. But what about those in the UK, or in the Navy who are currently uninvolved ? Do they get nothing but the Whitehall pen-pushers get rewarded ?
Gentleman Aviator
Like teeteringhead, I truly wonder at how the E grades afford to live, particularly the ones in London, on the meagre wage that they bring in.
One recalls once when working in Main Building, a new arrival commenting: "Why are so many of the Registry staff 40 year old bachelors still living with Mum in Essex?"
We pointed out that their pay scales gave 'em little choice.....
This ties in with the Tories plans to axe a third of CS posts at the MOD. What has been forgotten, is that having civilianised many important, but non-deployable posts (such as some MT drivers, suppliers etc), they have now become faceless CS and ripe for persecution.
The ire would be better directed at the officer corp of all 3 services, which has excess that could be easily trimmed, with the added value of reducing some of the superfluous layers of beaucracy they often create.
(Officer Corp stand fast - you do a great job, but you could be doing it in the field, instead of on work creation schemes in HQ's)
The ire would be better directed at the officer corp of all 3 services, which has excess that could be easily trimmed, with the added value of reducing some of the superfluous layers of beaucracy they often create.
(Officer Corp stand fast - you do a great job, but you could be doing it in the field, instead of on work creation schemes in HQ's)
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
One recalls once when working in Main Building, a new arrival commenting: "Why are so many of the Registry staff 40 year old bachelors still living with Mum in Essex?"
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: in the forest
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As has been covered by previous posters, performance related pay was forced upon the MoD CS by the Treasury, the hidden agenda being, as already stated, to cut the pension bill. It was universally hated and seen as devisive. Because of this it's been tinkered with every year since its inception. Currently, all get a standard bonus unless on restoring efficiency for whatever reason. The number of higher awards have been trimmed so you have to be doing something special to receive one. As you have to write your own evidence and your line manager adds their bit, sometimes it can hinge on how good both of you are with the written word!! That in itself is why it can be so unfair to some.
IMHO the majority of MoD CSs do a good job for little reward.
IMHO the majority of MoD CSs do a good job for little reward.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Falmouth
Posts: 1,651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't moan too much about performance related pay. Surely Performance related pay is a good thing? I have been on performance related pay for some years now and even as a serving Officer I can see the benefits it brings.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: East Midlands
Age: 84
Posts: 1,511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MOD Bonuses
Another strange way that these were organised is that people on the same pay band/Spine point were put together in a "cluster" and then that group of about 6 people were assessed for the award of a bonus. One year I was in a cluster with 2 other Sim Operators, an RSO, a Health & Safety man and 2 Met officers. How those varying tasks could be meaningfully compared I am not sure. In the end it seemed to come down to how "Glowing" one's APR/report was.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Road to Nowhere
Posts: 1,023
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As has been pointed out here, PR Pay is all very well if you have a reasonable means of assessing it.
Once I'd finished taking the mickey out of a C2 colleague at work today, we had a sensible discussion on what was wrong with the existing system. He is a budgets man and his view echos that of tucumseh and others; this was a system brought in when the CS was attempting to justify its position and demonstrate that an element of PR existed in its pay structure. In practice, the CS reporting system is almost entirely focussed on the 'bonus' and so everyone gets something. It's assessed based on annual reports often written by managers as worried about the demotivating effect of a low bonus as they are in the actual performance. However, as with all things MOD (and in the other ministries) there is not enough cash to go round so only a proportion of those eligible get the top amounts which, for the majority, is less than £500 PA (ie less than £10 or 3 cups of coffee a week).
I also think we need to stop comparing the CS with the uniformed elements as well; you are comparing apples with oranges - make no mistake, the x-factor and all the other little 'perks' that we get (health care etc) exist for one reason only, and that is to ensure the government has an Armed Forces that it can send to war in numbers and the best state possible. If they didn't have to provide it, it wouldn't be there.
STH
Once I'd finished taking the mickey out of a C2 colleague at work today, we had a sensible discussion on what was wrong with the existing system. He is a budgets man and his view echos that of tucumseh and others; this was a system brought in when the CS was attempting to justify its position and demonstrate that an element of PR existed in its pay structure. In practice, the CS reporting system is almost entirely focussed on the 'bonus' and so everyone gets something. It's assessed based on annual reports often written by managers as worried about the demotivating effect of a low bonus as they are in the actual performance. However, as with all things MOD (and in the other ministries) there is not enough cash to go round so only a proportion of those eligible get the top amounts which, for the majority, is less than £500 PA (ie less than £10 or 3 cups of coffee a week).
I also think we need to stop comparing the CS with the uniformed elements as well; you are comparing apples with oranges - make no mistake, the x-factor and all the other little 'perks' that we get (health care etc) exist for one reason only, and that is to ensure the government has an Armed Forces that it can send to war in numbers and the best state possible. If they didn't have to provide it, it wouldn't be there.
STH
Last edited by SirToppamHat; 13th Nov 2009 at 08:23.