Changes to CEA
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If this is the aim, and the best of the UK's military minds and workforce are forced to leave (or opt to leave due to eroded pay and conditions)
In this statement, you fall into the same trap as every other apologist for CEA, in supposing that it is somehow meritocratic, or that it rewards talent. This is rubbish.
There is absolutely no correlation between a service person's individual preferences about the merits of a state or private education and his/her ability to do their job well.
In fact, my experience of CEA claimants is overwhelmingly the reverse ... mediocre officers who remain trapped in posts that give them no joy, and to which they add no value, but benefiting from a rewards package far, far greater than the singlies working alongside them. That is why CEA is under threat ... and will continue to be so until Defence starts to pay people what they are worth, not what it costs them to fund a lifestyle they think they are entitled to.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Greenie Lynx Pilot,
You confuse one sentence that potentially goes off thread with a wider observation on the decline of service personnel terms and conditions, with the fundamental main point with the current situation in the ambiguous state of the future education of service children and a recent very dubious software driven survey by an MOD agency.
As to any correlation about merits of public/state education - don't be daft, of course there are some extremely good state schools (I know because I went to one).
Your wider point about increasing the value and worth of service personnel and adjusting their Ts&Cs is certainly nothing to do with CEA, and if in your environment you have that mediocre contingent then I feel sorry for you. I do not work in such an environment, infact the opposite, I work with some exceptionally talented people that sacrifice alot as a 'servant of the crown' but they do so knowing that their wife and children are cared for.
The big point I was making was by all means remove CEA, more than happy with that - but before the MOD starts commissioning statistical surveys from one of it's agencies that it should inform the service parents of the alternatives. The MOD cannot have it's cake and eat it, it cannot remove mobility for a couple of years, and then all of a sudden request a posting away from home base if the child is half way through key academic stages.
This my friend is the concerns of any service family, and not a mediocre work force.
Once the MOD has told service families what it proposes to replace CEA, then Greenie all of your mediocre work makes that you believe have the misfortune to be 'trapped' can all make an informed decision about how they want their families brought up.
It still will not get you a pay rise though!
You confuse one sentence that potentially goes off thread with a wider observation on the decline of service personnel terms and conditions, with the fundamental main point with the current situation in the ambiguous state of the future education of service children and a recent very dubious software driven survey by an MOD agency.
As to any correlation about merits of public/state education - don't be daft, of course there are some extremely good state schools (I know because I went to one).
Your wider point about increasing the value and worth of service personnel and adjusting their Ts&Cs is certainly nothing to do with CEA, and if in your environment you have that mediocre contingent then I feel sorry for you. I do not work in such an environment, infact the opposite, I work with some exceptionally talented people that sacrifice alot as a 'servant of the crown' but they do so knowing that their wife and children are cared for.
The big point I was making was by all means remove CEA, more than happy with that - but before the MOD starts commissioning statistical surveys from one of it's agencies that it should inform the service parents of the alternatives. The MOD cannot have it's cake and eat it, it cannot remove mobility for a couple of years, and then all of a sudden request a posting away from home base if the child is half way through key academic stages.
This my friend is the concerns of any service family, and not a mediocre work force.
Once the MOD has told service families what it proposes to replace CEA, then Greenie all of your mediocre work makes that you believe have the misfortune to be 'trapped' can all make an informed decision about how they want their families brought up.
It still will not get you a pay rise though!
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Somewhere nice overseas.
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GLP - Please answer the below and tell me my way ahead.
In simple terms......
I'm on an accompanied overseas tour. I'm here because HMG wanted me here. Allowances I based my decision to accept the job on have been slashed by several hundreds of pounds, net, per month. It's painful. Bit off topic, but still.
My 15 year old child is at boarding school in the UK. What would you have me do - should I have taken him overseas a year or so ago at the start of his GCSE critical period because my employer wants me here?
CEA is there for mobility and flexible employment of personnel. I'm not sure I agree with it for primary school age offspring, but for older children it is really important.
What am I meant to do if it is discontinued? I doubt they would chop it mid-tour/claim, but who knows. What should I do then?
Thanks.
In simple terms......
I'm on an accompanied overseas tour. I'm here because HMG wanted me here. Allowances I based my decision to accept the job on have been slashed by several hundreds of pounds, net, per month. It's painful. Bit off topic, but still.
My 15 year old child is at boarding school in the UK. What would you have me do - should I have taken him overseas a year or so ago at the start of his GCSE critical period because my employer wants me here?
CEA is there for mobility and flexible employment of personnel. I'm not sure I agree with it for primary school age offspring, but for older children it is really important.
What am I meant to do if it is discontinued? I doubt they would chop it mid-tour/claim, but who knows. What should I do then?
Thanks.
Thread Starter
Green Lynx Pilot,
I think that you are out of order.
As with Scuttled, I am in an interesting non-traditional post abroad working in an international environment - not on a Garrison or PJOB, not on a US base, indeed not even near a city of any particular merit. It is remote, there are no suitable English-language schools nearby (indeed the closest International School is in another country) and UK boarding is the only realistic option (which costs us an absolute packet, as well). I would like to think that I am not mediocre and that my son is getting an education that he is entitled to and that I am serving HMG's interests aborad. If not, this post wouldn't exist.
PS: GLP - were you beaten up by a Public School boy in an earlier life?
Brown Job:
The investigation is looking how the 'extras bills' were being swallowed up and ascribed to some other budget area...ie no parental contribution
I think that you are out of order.
As with Scuttled, I am in an interesting non-traditional post abroad working in an international environment - not on a Garrison or PJOB, not on a US base, indeed not even near a city of any particular merit. It is remote, there are no suitable English-language schools nearby (indeed the closest International School is in another country) and UK boarding is the only realistic option (which costs us an absolute packet, as well). I would like to think that I am not mediocre and that my son is getting an education that he is entitled to and that I am serving HMG's interests aborad. If not, this post wouldn't exist.
PS: GLP - were you beaten up by a Public School boy in an earlier life?
Brown Job:
The investigation is looking how the 'extras bills' were being swallowed up and ascribed to some other budget area...ie no parental contribution
Last edited by Whenurhappy; 14th Feb 2011 at 08:31.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If your employer needs you to be in a location that is incompatible with your family commitments, then the compensation package for that appointment should, quite properly, be sufficient to allow that care to be provided in some other way - by all means through boarding if that flicks your switch.
However, most of the posters on this, and other threads, are at pains to stress the C in CEA ... continuity. This, they argue, justifies an expensive perk for all service personnel who might, at any point in their children's education, be employed in a location as described above; for this, they expect their lifestyle choice and personal aspirations to be funded by someone else, in some cases for more than a decade.
This is a very expensive way for the MOD to buy flexibility and mobility in its workforce. Right now, expensive is not something we can afford. Also, the flip side of "expensive for the MOD" translates directly to "valuable to the employee". It is this additional, and unmerited benefit that accrues to some employees, based not on their talent but on their proclivity to breed and their aspiration for a private education for their spawn, which annoys me (and not some imagined beating I ever took at the hands of some toff).
Many people pay for a private education for their children out of their net income - and hats off to them. Bleating that it should be the service that foots the bill, or that it is the service who is the real beneficiary of this scheme when the reality is quite patently the reverse in a great many cases, smacks of public sector largesse and officials with their noses in the trough. MPs expenses, anyone?
If CEA really was just a compensatory allowance, then surely any claimant could easily sell their labour on the open market to any other employer who would be more than willing to offer a comparable rewards package to allow similar lifestyle choices to be funded from net income, right? The phrase "boarding school trap" would have absolutely no salience. And, most telling of all, no one would be on this forum bleating about the loss of an allowance which is little more than a fair compensation for their working conditions, and which any other employer would match - either explicitly or by some other proxy such as higher pay. Thought not.
However, most of the posters on this, and other threads, are at pains to stress the C in CEA ... continuity. This, they argue, justifies an expensive perk for all service personnel who might, at any point in their children's education, be employed in a location as described above; for this, they expect their lifestyle choice and personal aspirations to be funded by someone else, in some cases for more than a decade.
This is a very expensive way for the MOD to buy flexibility and mobility in its workforce. Right now, expensive is not something we can afford. Also, the flip side of "expensive for the MOD" translates directly to "valuable to the employee". It is this additional, and unmerited benefit that accrues to some employees, based not on their talent but on their proclivity to breed and their aspiration for a private education for their spawn, which annoys me (and not some imagined beating I ever took at the hands of some toff).
Many people pay for a private education for their children out of their net income - and hats off to them. Bleating that it should be the service that foots the bill, or that it is the service who is the real beneficiary of this scheme when the reality is quite patently the reverse in a great many cases, smacks of public sector largesse and officials with their noses in the trough. MPs expenses, anyone?
If CEA really was just a compensatory allowance, then surely any claimant could easily sell their labour on the open market to any other employer who would be more than willing to offer a comparable rewards package to allow similar lifestyle choices to be funded from net income, right? The phrase "boarding school trap" would have absolutely no salience. And, most telling of all, no one would be on this forum bleating about the loss of an allowance which is little more than a fair compensation for their working conditions, and which any other employer would match - either explicitly or by some other proxy such as higher pay. Thought not.
Thread Starter
GLP,
You raise an interesting point - ie private education made available when required when it is in the interests of the Service. However, that is not the same as provision of continuity of education, which is the stated aim of the allowance. My son, for example, has been boarding for 2 1/2 years now; in that time I have served in London and two consecutive overseas posts (part of an all-too complicated posting jigsaw). However if I were to return to the UK if this post goes (quite apart from my stated desire to leave) my son would then be obliged to leave his school as he approaches a critical period, providing no continuity whatsoever.
This is the change in the new regulations: yes - boarding school will be part-funded when there are no practical maintained school alternatives; otherwise, loss of continuity will arise, therefore punishing the children because of decisions made about the career of one (or both) of their parents. The 'new' regulations are about providing subsitute schooling and not about providing continuity.
Clearly it was Grammar School Boy who stole your lunch money!
You raise an interesting point - ie private education made available when required when it is in the interests of the Service. However, that is not the same as provision of continuity of education, which is the stated aim of the allowance. My son, for example, has been boarding for 2 1/2 years now; in that time I have served in London and two consecutive overseas posts (part of an all-too complicated posting jigsaw). However if I were to return to the UK if this post goes (quite apart from my stated desire to leave) my son would then be obliged to leave his school as he approaches a critical period, providing no continuity whatsoever.
This is the change in the new regulations: yes - boarding school will be part-funded when there are no practical maintained school alternatives; otherwise, loss of continuity will arise, therefore punishing the children because of decisions made about the career of one (or both) of their parents. The 'new' regulations are about providing subsitute schooling and not about providing continuity.
Clearly it was Grammar School Boy who stole your lunch money!
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure why GLP is getting such a hard time for stating the bleedin obvious.
Those of you who have a genuine and real need of CEA in it's present format are going to be gang raped by the bean counters because of the plethora of thieving pikeys who have been claiming CEA when they know full well they have more chance of becoming Pope than they have of being posted
Those of you who have a genuine and real need of CEA in it's present format are going to be gang raped by the bean counters because of the plethora of thieving pikeys who have been claiming CEA when they know full well they have more chance of becoming Pope than they have of being posted
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: england
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MaroonMan4
Civil Servants don't make all the decisions about CEA, these people probably do have some input into the decision making process, I only see one Civil Servant on the list:
MoD Publishes Military Covenant Report | Think Defence
Service Personnel Directors
Major-General Andrew Gregory, DG Pers, Army
Air Cdre Dan Hill, Head of Strategy and Programmes, DCDS (PERS)
Lt General Mark Mans, Adjutant General
Commodore Michael Mansergh, Director Navy Personel
Air Vice-Marshal David Murray, ACDS (PERS)
Group Captain Paul O‟Neill, DACOS Pers Strat, RAF
Wg Cdr D J Read, Pensions Compensation and Veterans, MOD
Lt Gen Sir Bill Rollo, DCDS (PERS), and former Adjutant General
Grp Capt Carol Smith, DCDS Pers-SCW-AFW Asst Head
Tracey Vennai, Deputy Head, Pensions Compensation and Veterans, MOD
Commodore Simon Williams, Director Naval Personnel Strategy
Squadron-Leader Jason Chalk, DCDS PERS-PM-SO2
I'm sure a trawl through the DII Global address list for DCDS Pers will show a large number of military personnel in influential positions.
MoD Publishes Military Covenant Report | Think Defence
Service Personnel Directors
Major-General Andrew Gregory, DG Pers, Army
Air Cdre Dan Hill, Head of Strategy and Programmes, DCDS (PERS)
Lt General Mark Mans, Adjutant General
Commodore Michael Mansergh, Director Navy Personel
Air Vice-Marshal David Murray, ACDS (PERS)
Group Captain Paul O‟Neill, DACOS Pers Strat, RAF
Wg Cdr D J Read, Pensions Compensation and Veterans, MOD
Lt Gen Sir Bill Rollo, DCDS (PERS), and former Adjutant General
Grp Capt Carol Smith, DCDS Pers-SCW-AFW Asst Head
Tracey Vennai, Deputy Head, Pensions Compensation and Veterans, MOD
Commodore Simon Williams, Director Naval Personnel Strategy
Squadron-Leader Jason Chalk, DCDS PERS-PM-SO2
I'm sure a trawl through the DII Global address list for DCDS Pers will show a large number of military personnel in influential positions.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, it would be unlike the MOD to institute a policy they haven't thought through carefully...
Clearly this will also mean an end to the calls from the Desk Officer for the short-notice posting due to the 'Service Need' catch-all? The allowances had inherent flexibility in them so that families could feel that there was at least an attempt to maintain quality if life, if it all become harder to acquire due to increased stringency in the rules, then the Desk Officers must come under equal scrutiny. I have never really had any career management, but this will become vital in the post SDSR RAF.
Clearly this will also mean an end to the calls from the Desk Officer for the short-notice posting due to the 'Service Need' catch-all? The allowances had inherent flexibility in them so that families could feel that there was at least an attempt to maintain quality if life, if it all become harder to acquire due to increased stringency in the rules, then the Desk Officers must come under equal scrutiny. I have never really had any career management, but this will become vital in the post SDSR RAF.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Somewhere nice overseas.
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lordy. What a lot of wordy posts.
Simply, because I like it that way and we can all follow/argue about it more easily.
Me.
Joined up very young, airman 16, silly as I was and made nco (young again), was keen went nca did ok and got promoted in that too, went commissioned back end - hopefully still useful- have done ooa tours often, like most, and am doing something interesting now. Been around, wife moved mostly, but not every time. Overseas again. Didn't get hitched at 18 to the love of my life (!) to be apart for prolonged periods. I'm now still useful to my employer, yet due to my, erm, career path, not a very senior bloke.
Signed on to 55. I've no intention of leaving. Redundancy scares the sh1t out of me. Honestly. The RAF has had all I have got, good enough or not, and to give my chosen employer that, all I have asked extra is 5 years of cea on a 37 year engagement so that my boy has a decent chance to do well in life. Not through public school snobbery (please....) but continuity in the most important educational years he has.
So, 37 years commitment (and I am committed) for an extra 80K or so. Is that wrong, am I asking too much? I have pledged my entire working life to the service I still, unfashionably, love.
There you go. Heart on my sleeve. Shoot me down.
Simply, because I like it that way and we can all follow/argue about it more easily.
Me.
Joined up very young, airman 16, silly as I was and made nco (young again), was keen went nca did ok and got promoted in that too, went commissioned back end - hopefully still useful- have done ooa tours often, like most, and am doing something interesting now. Been around, wife moved mostly, but not every time. Overseas again. Didn't get hitched at 18 to the love of my life (!) to be apart for prolonged periods. I'm now still useful to my employer, yet due to my, erm, career path, not a very senior bloke.
Signed on to 55. I've no intention of leaving. Redundancy scares the sh1t out of me. Honestly. The RAF has had all I have got, good enough or not, and to give my chosen employer that, all I have asked extra is 5 years of cea on a 37 year engagement so that my boy has a decent chance to do well in life. Not through public school snobbery (please....) but continuity in the most important educational years he has.
So, 37 years commitment (and I am committed) for an extra 80K or so. Is that wrong, am I asking too much? I have pledged my entire working life to the service I still, unfashionably, love.
There you go. Heart on my sleeve. Shoot me down.
Thread Starter
I'm not sure that re-publishing the names of those officers is particularly helpful, nonetheless I know four of them quite well (2 of them very well) and I know that they are familiar with the system that we are discussing - also several are unmarried and don't have children - and have not served overseas except on short-term detachments, unaccompanied of course. Most of the RAF are of the old Admin (Sec) Branch, too. AVM Murray is a particularly interesting chap, especially given his family background - father was Gen Sec of the TUC in the 1980s.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Advice needed please
What documents do you need to provide to have next terms fees authorised?
My unit need a copy of last terms fees plus a copy of the next terms fees.
My school does not usually release next terms fee until a week before the end of term. If this is the norm why has the claim window already been open for a while. It does not help now being wet, muddy soon to be hot and dusty located. Handbrake house's words were 'Your wife cant bring in the bill when you receive it' would love to but there would be a 150 mile travel claim going in to support it.
Thanks in advance
What documents do you need to provide to have next terms fees authorised?
My unit need a copy of last terms fees plus a copy of the next terms fees.
My school does not usually release next terms fee until a week before the end of term. If this is the norm why has the claim window already been open for a while. It does not help now being wet, muddy soon to be hot and dusty located. Handbrake house's words were 'Your wife cant bring in the bill when you receive it' would love to but there would be a 150 mile travel claim going in to support it.
Thanks in advance
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Several miles SSW of Watford Gap
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My unit admin (AGC(SPS)) just need a receipted copy of the previous term's bill.
Edited to add that I have just checked the JSP (JSP752, Chapter 9, Section 1, Annex E, Sub-para 1d) the current original bill is pnly required if SENA or admissible extras are being claimed, otherwise it is the receipt from the previous term.
Other docs required are
A valid CEA Eligibility certificate.
If there is an increase in school fees, a statement from the school.
Details of any childcare vouchers being used.
Edited to add that I have just checked the JSP (JSP752, Chapter 9, Section 1, Annex E, Sub-para 1d) the current original bill is pnly required if SENA or admissible extras are being claimed, otherwise it is the receipt from the previous term.
Other docs required are
A valid CEA Eligibility certificate.
If there is an increase in school fees, a statement from the school.
Details of any childcare vouchers being used.
Last edited by Climebear; 10th Mar 2011 at 13:53.
Thread Starter
A call to the school Bursar and they will provide you a 'draft' invoice for next term's fees and a receipted copy of your previous term.
Because of my remote location I receive scanned copies from teh school to my hotmail account which I forward to my parenting unit - which accepts them, because of teh difficulties in getting ahrd copies in a realistic timeframe.
Separately, it is certainly worth asking the school to increase the level of MOD Bursary if you are finding it financially tight.
Because of my remote location I receive scanned copies from teh school to my hotmail account which I forward to my parenting unit - which accepts them, because of teh difficulties in getting ahrd copies in a realistic timeframe.
Separately, it is certainly worth asking the school to increase the level of MOD Bursary if you are finding it financially tight.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cheers Guys
It must be Rompers Green admin then. I've only been claiming it for 6 years and always run in to hastles with this, also try explaining to them I never did that at my previous unit. Visit to the chief clerk on return me thinks
It must be Rompers Green admin then. I've only been claiming it for 6 years and always run in to hastles with this, also try explaining to them I never did that at my previous unit. Visit to the chief clerk on return me thinks
For those that may be re-considering the CEA,
As a result in the changes in allowances and CEA regs, the system is now prepared to allow parents/servicemen to remove their children from boarding school without recovery action being taken against them. Check the latest DINs.
As a result in the changes in allowances and CEA regs, the system is now prepared to allow parents/servicemen to remove their children from boarding school without recovery action being taken against them. Check the latest DINs.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For those that may be re-considering the CEA,
As a result in the changes in allowances and CEA regs, the system is now prepared to allow parents/servicemen to remove their children from boarding school without recovery action being taken against them. Check the latest DINs.
As a result in the changes in allowances and CEA regs, the system is now prepared to allow parents/servicemen to remove their children from boarding school without recovery action being taken against them. Check the latest DINs.
Would love to see the stats on how many folk are suddenly having a change of heart over this
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Road to Nowhere
Posts: 1,023
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I saw this a couple of weeks back in the form of a 'T-Letter'. As I recall, the announcement is the result of changes elsewhere in the regs that mean pers posted to MOD may not have the opportunity to be 'accompanied' because the system is so f***ed-up, but whereas previously they were considered 'involuntarily' unaccompanied, that is now no longer the case, so the entitlement to CEA ceases at one-term's notice. In light of this, the changes to CEA are now catching up with reality.
Seeing that they will shortly be screwed by the system, some people are electing to withdraw from the scheme at their own (and their kids own) convenience rather than waiting to be bankrupted or simply having the rug pulled from under them. This goes against one of the principles of the scheme - that people can't opt in and out as it suits, hence the necessity for a change of policy. I understand that in some circumstances, people may be able to opt back in to the system.
The lunatics have finally taken over the asylum.
If I read it right, one of the reasons we are in this mess is that there is an inadequate number of FQs in London to enable personnel to serve 'accompanied'.
Just coming back to Nomorefreetime's point, I have never been asked to provide an estimate for the following term's fees; however, I have
been asked to provide evidence that mychild has a place when starting a new school and/or moving from one stage of education to the next.
STH
Seeing that they will shortly be screwed by the system, some people are electing to withdraw from the scheme at their own (and their kids own) convenience rather than waiting to be bankrupted or simply having the rug pulled from under them. This goes against one of the principles of the scheme - that people can't opt in and out as it suits, hence the necessity for a change of policy. I understand that in some circumstances, people may be able to opt back in to the system.
The lunatics have finally taken over the asylum.
If I read it right, one of the reasons we are in this mess is that there is an inadequate number of FQs in London to enable personnel to serve 'accompanied'.
Just coming back to Nomorefreetime's point, I have never been asked to provide an estimate for the following term's fees; however, I have
been asked to provide evidence that mychild has a place when starting a new school and/or moving from one stage of education to the next.
STH
Last edited by SirToppamHat; 21st Apr 2011 at 21:09.