25%+ cut in allowances!
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
If the beanies decided you should live in during the week and paid only the one return journey per week you could claim tax relief at 40p/ for the other 4 return journeys.
should be eligible
In the example I quoted (3 hours each way, each day) the regs say (or can be interpreted as saying) the travelling time can be deemed working hours. I recall one guy pitching up, working 1.5 hours, then going home, saying he'd done his 37 hours at the end of the week. This went down like a lead balloon and he was told to start doing 14 hour days like the rest of us. After a year he submitted an application for about 9 months time off in lieu! He got what he (and his family) wanted - a transfer back to permanent duty station; but no more promotion. I guess in the Services he'd have been locked up.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: England
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry guys, but reading the posts of some of the serving personnel you come across as extremely naive and totally out of touch with commercial realities. The airline market will pick up but the majority of airlines will employ the cheapest people they can get - probably some kid willing to work for peanuts to build hours. For all those who are thinking of throwing their toys out the pram, be very, very careful. You may find you are unemployed for some considerable period and/or working for an awful lot less. Sure, one or two leavers will get great, well paid jobs and shout it from the rooftops, but a lot of posters on here have such bad attitudes and massive chips no one will touch you. The jobs market is currently saturated and it's going to get worse before it gets better, so maybe you should try to look for the positives rather than the negatives. Even if your allowances are cut you will still have a pay, pension and reimbursement package better than 99.9% of people.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Tuc, no, he would have been offered a quarter, mess, or SSSA.
Usual rules, you play ball with me, I'll stuff the bat right up . . .
Usual rules, you play ball with me, I'll stuff the bat right up . . .
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Round&Round, Glad Rag,
what "the other 99.9% of people" get is in my opinion irrelevant. We in HM Forces have voluntarily signed away some of our fundamental rights and as a quid pro quo HMG has agreed to look after us and our families. We have an unlimited liability to the government up to and including killing and being killed, unlike any other workers, and as such our circumstances are unique. Having fulfilled my side of the bargain for almost 20 years with the accompanying physical, mental and social penalties it is only right that HMG fulfill their obligations in return. I cannot step away from my obligations without leaving the service, what the government appears to want to do is to reduce its obligations to me whilst still retaining my unlimited liability. The psychological covenant between me and the service has just about been broken and it won't take much more in the way of further reducing my allowances/quality of life/etc to destroy it irrevocably.
I don't expect a gravy train or to make a profit out of my allowances but I certainly don't expect to be out of pocket for serving my country. I've already sacrificed any number of things over the years, can the powers that be can let me have back all of the times I've let people down as well as the cancelled holidays, missed birthdays, Christmases, sons first steps/words/day at school or umpteen changes of school? Can they give me back all of my mates who are no longer with us? If they can then I might be prepared to accept these chages but of course thay can't, so why should I maintain my side of the bargain when they can't maintain theirs?
MB
what "the other 99.9% of people" get is in my opinion irrelevant. We in HM Forces have voluntarily signed away some of our fundamental rights and as a quid pro quo HMG has agreed to look after us and our families. We have an unlimited liability to the government up to and including killing and being killed, unlike any other workers, and as such our circumstances are unique. Having fulfilled my side of the bargain for almost 20 years with the accompanying physical, mental and social penalties it is only right that HMG fulfill their obligations in return. I cannot step away from my obligations without leaving the service, what the government appears to want to do is to reduce its obligations to me whilst still retaining my unlimited liability. The psychological covenant between me and the service has just about been broken and it won't take much more in the way of further reducing my allowances/quality of life/etc to destroy it irrevocably.
I don't expect a gravy train or to make a profit out of my allowances but I certainly don't expect to be out of pocket for serving my country. I've already sacrificed any number of things over the years, can the powers that be can let me have back all of the times I've let people down as well as the cancelled holidays, missed birthdays, Christmases, sons first steps/words/day at school or umpteen changes of school? Can they give me back all of my mates who are no longer with us? If they can then I might be prepared to accept these chages but of course thay can't, so why should I maintain my side of the bargain when they can't maintain theirs?
MB
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Before I joined up, I had a pretty crap job, but actually took a pay cut to join the RAF, even though the responsibility in the RAF was far more than the post I had outside. We are now much better paid and it grates when people see such complaining about pay and allowances on here. I have worked with some who know more about the allowances package than Accounts ever seem to, but they also spend their time claiming the very last penny like an absolute pedant. I didn't join the RAF because of the allowances package, I joined because it was the job I wanted to do, and still enjoy it. The pain isn't nice, but you can either complain about it and leave, or stay and make the best of it.
Incidentally, we all seem to know someone who left and is making a packet, but all of the civvy jobs I have looked at have never promised that much, unless there is loads of extra pain involved - why aren't some of the shop stewards on here not on some 6 figure salary? Why don't people stop complaining or using this as yet another route to highlight their embittered attitude towards flying pay? How about a little less doom and a bit more wondering what the future might look like - cup half-full anyone?
Incidentally, we all seem to know someone who left and is making a packet, but all of the civvy jobs I have looked at have never promised that much, unless there is loads of extra pain involved - why aren't some of the shop stewards on here not on some 6 figure salary? Why don't people stop complaining or using this as yet another route to highlight their embittered attitude towards flying pay? How about a little less doom and a bit more wondering what the future might look like - cup half-full anyone?
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Another S**thole
Age: 51
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MB
Well said - the other 99.9% haven't been putting their lives on the line.
For those of us who have been on continuous operations since GRANBY and have buried several friends through to the 18 year old squaddies currently engaging the TB on a daily basis, none of us joined for the allowance package.
To strip what is left away and compare us to our civilian counterparts is not acceptable.
Well said - the other 99.9% haven't been putting their lives on the line.
For those of us who have been on continuous operations since GRANBY and have buried several friends through to the 18 year old squaddies currently engaging the TB on a daily basis, none of us joined for the allowance package.
To strip what is left away and compare us to our civilian counterparts is not acceptable.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Here, there and everywhere
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MB - Well said; I agree completely that we shouldn't be trying to make money from allowances but they should at least cover the expenditure we have when performing duties for HMG.
Some on here forget that we do not choose where we live (I agree that I gave up this right on joining) and that HDT is to compensate you for actual expenditure incurred because you are being forced to live where you might not necessarily would chose to do so. At least in civvy street you can chose to live 1 mile or 100 miles from work.
CS - I think you have missed MB's points and the fact that most of us still want to serve and meet our obligations to the Country. However, I do not expect to have to pay for the privilege of being ordered to attend courses or to move from one location to the other, or to have my family suffer emotionally or financially due to this increased nibbling to death by ducks. I accept your point that if we don't like it we should leave; I am weighing up that very option over the next 12 months. However, and it may sound trite (or a similar rhyming word) to you, but I still want to serve my Country and am proud of my Service despite all that has recently happened. I do hope that this does not push out the good (or average in my case) leaving only the bad to fill the gaps.
Rant off
Twon
Some on here forget that we do not choose where we live (I agree that I gave up this right on joining) and that HDT is to compensate you for actual expenditure incurred because you are being forced to live where you might not necessarily would chose to do so. At least in civvy street you can chose to live 1 mile or 100 miles from work.
CS - I think you have missed MB's points and the fact that most of us still want to serve and meet our obligations to the Country. However, I do not expect to have to pay for the privilege of being ordered to attend courses or to move from one location to the other, or to have my family suffer emotionally or financially due to this increased nibbling to death by ducks. I accept your point that if we don't like it we should leave; I am weighing up that very option over the next 12 months. However, and it may sound trite (or a similar rhyming word) to you, but I still want to serve my Country and am proud of my Service despite all that has recently happened. I do hope that this does not push out the good (or average in my case) leaving only the bad to fill the gaps.
Rant off
Twon
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: .Lincs.
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the 'pre-briefing' to the torygraph it seems that HDT may be up for slimng down, any thoughts on GYH(P/D)? DHE is a massive burden on the MOD so they are fairly keen for servicepersons to buy their own house, put down roots, etc. If career/service needs requires an individual to move away from a commutable distance, it is probably of benefit to all if they 'suck it up', the family stay put, and they move into the mess for the duration - no need for expensive move, no SFQ (which I sure the MOD would rather be shot of) and no CEA implications. If we lose GYH allowance then I imagine there will be both an increase in PVR rate and an immediate surge in applications for SFQ, something which there are hardly enough of now.
day1-week1, you're thinking again, stop it.
As much as we are broke, this is a political decision which is why I believe the final say is sitting with the PM. It wouldn't look particularly good for the PM to make a statement on the military covenant only for the MOD / Treasury to undercut him.
That said, I wait with interest to see the outcome - I'm already taking home less as level 1 SO2 than I did as an level 9 SO3 due to a combination of changes to allowances, not getting allowances paid, higher tax and having to move back in to the Mess to do a weekly commute. There's only so much people are willing to take.
Go on Dave, press to test, we dare you.
As much as we are broke, this is a political decision which is why I believe the final say is sitting with the PM. It wouldn't look particularly good for the PM to make a statement on the military covenant only for the MOD / Treasury to undercut him.
That said, I wait with interest to see the outcome - I'm already taking home less as level 1 SO2 than I did as an level 9 SO3 due to a combination of changes to allowances, not getting allowances paid, higher tax and having to move back in to the Mess to do a weekly commute. There's only so much people are willing to take.
Go on Dave, press to test, we dare you.
Last edited by Melchett01; 5th Dec 2010 at 17:37.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well said - the other 99.9% haven't been putting their lives on the line.
Before you jump down my throat and say I don't know what I'm talking about members of my family, including me, have served in the military since the beginning of the last century.
You place yourself in the top 0.1% of the world population just because you serve in the military? You should take your blinkers off old son.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: lincs
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re HDT. I suggest if everyone applied for a married quarter (or whatever the PC term is now used for a house that you live in with your family) in a coordinated strike on DHE the combined effect might just make the decision makers sit up and listen.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lord Spandex Masher,
the 99.9% stat was as utilised by another poster, I merely recycled it in rebuttal. The actual stat/percentage is irrelevant and I certainly don't consider myself anything special because of my job choice (we're all volunteers after all) but equally I don't expect the unique element (kill/be killed) of it to be ignored by my employers when it comes to the measures/incentives used to recruit and retain me. They've been happy to have 20 years of unlimited commitment from me and now they expect to retain that commitment whilst degrading and in some areas eradicating their commitment to me. Yes there are other jobs in the world with an inherent risk of death and they no doubt by and large attract the appropriate level of pay, but (and it's a big but) other than other niche occupations (i.e police firearms officer) we are the only people for whom giving up your life and taking somebody else's is for some of us explicit in our job and for everyone else contained in the "and any other duties as detailed" part of the job description.
So no, I don't consider myself special as an individual but I do believe that the unique nature of the ultimate consequence of my lawful actions (death) requires special consideration by HMG when addressing how I and my family are treated.
MB
the 99.9% stat was as utilised by another poster, I merely recycled it in rebuttal. The actual stat/percentage is irrelevant and I certainly don't consider myself anything special because of my job choice (we're all volunteers after all) but equally I don't expect the unique element (kill/be killed) of it to be ignored by my employers when it comes to the measures/incentives used to recruit and retain me. They've been happy to have 20 years of unlimited commitment from me and now they expect to retain that commitment whilst degrading and in some areas eradicating their commitment to me. Yes there are other jobs in the world with an inherent risk of death and they no doubt by and large attract the appropriate level of pay, but (and it's a big but) other than other niche occupations (i.e police firearms officer) we are the only people for whom giving up your life and taking somebody else's is for some of us explicit in our job and for everyone else contained in the "and any other duties as detailed" part of the job description.
So no, I don't consider myself special as an individual but I do believe that the unique nature of the ultimate consequence of my lawful actions (death) requires special consideration by HMG when addressing how I and my family are treated.
MB
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
PFMG, I doubt it.
There is an historical lack of SFA at High Wycombe so they stick people all over the place and into hirings. Hirings aren't what they used to be but they are used extensively.
Applying for quarters would be barely perceptible to those that matter.
The real crunch would be if people did opt for the messes. Until recently they expected visitors to double up, could that become a norm again?
There is an historical lack of SFA at High Wycombe so they stick people all over the place and into hirings. Hirings aren't what they used to be but they are used extensively.
Applying for quarters would be barely perceptible to those that matter.
The real crunch would be if people did opt for the messes. Until recently they expected visitors to double up, could that become a norm again?
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MB, my response was aimed at Blighter Pilot.
I certainly agree with you that retention incentives are a must in these high risk jobs. There is no doubt about it in my mind and I certainly do not condone a reduction in incentives - or indeed any other part of your life - for the same level of commitment from you.
I was just making a point.
I certainly agree with you that retention incentives are a must in these high risk jobs. There is no doubt about it in my mind and I certainly do not condone a reduction in incentives - or indeed any other part of your life - for the same level of commitment from you.
I was just making a point.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Back to the fold in the map
Posts: 382
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
Allowances
Here's another one that has slipped in beneath the radar. If one arranged the trip to one's overseas posting, one received an allowance that was the equivalent of the airfare - for however many were travelling. Now it appears that the airfare to be used is Sleazy Jet -(there are other cheap airlines available). The upshot is that whilst I only lost about £100 on my trip to my current location, on my return I will be given approx 75 of Her Majesty's pounds to cover a bill that will be in the region of £600, just for ferry fares. Check out the change from Privately Arranged Passage to Privately Assisted Passage for more details. 
