Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Quarter of RAF trainee pilots to be sacked

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Quarter of RAF trainee pilots to be sacked

Old 16th Feb 2011, 09:56
  #221 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 542
The sad thing is that we'll be scratching around for pilots again in a few years time. Why do I say that? Because every "redundancy" scheme since 1974 has been the same. The trough is always lower than expected by normally, quite a margin. Far be it for me to disagree with Sir Michael but we have always had holding posts and now's no difference. Just manage the surplus and wait for the airlines to make space in the middle mamnagement. Oh I forgot, salaries are now the short term expense driving policy.

Never throw away the seed corn thats my motto.
Geehovah is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2011, 10:56
  #222 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France 46
Age: 73
Posts: 1,745
When Red Line Entry says "its all about money" that is, in my opinion, not quite correct - but the financial aspect most certainly is a major factor.

Nobody has alluded to the fact that last year was the 65th anniversary of the end of WW2 when millions of Service Personnel returned home after years away.

The "happy reunions" with loved ones resulted in a massive baby boom in 1946/7 and the millions of male babies who have survived to celebrate their 65th Birthday will retire this year and next in receipt of the State Old Age Pension. At the same time, of course, National Insurance contributions will suffer a major decline and there will be an increasing burden on Local Government Social Services and the NHS.

The Coalition may have secured a narrow majority but they also inherited a "poisoned chalice".
cazatou is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2011, 10:58
  #223 (permalink)  
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: YORKS
Posts: 122
4 years ago, when working as an EFT QFI, we were pushing through far too many students, as course numbers were doubled and extra courses added.

I raised the question of " where exactly are all these pilots going to go given the fleets that are retiring and delays in future ones??" of course, no answer was given...

The hierarchy and system have let these people down by not addressing inherent problems. The RAF preaches doctrine, ethos, core values to these people, and yet it is so hypocritical given that we are just numbers.

Good luck to all, there is life out there in civvy world!
3 bladed beast is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2011, 11:13
  #224 (permalink)  
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,492
Many years ago, when trying to fit VC10 courses into the programme, I asked why the heck were we even contemplating course which had less than full trainee crews. The workload on the staff was almost the same when training a full crew as it was when training only 2 pilots, no engineers and no navigators because the engineer and navigator instructors would be required to operate, so that the student pilots wouldn't have to cope with possible non-SOP or substandard operation from 'guests'. But 'part crew' courses were such a waste of money.

"We've always done it that way"

Even the boss (not the most popular Sqn Cdr we ever had) asked 'them' why we didn't just arrange courses when there was a need, rather than on some dubious calendar basis. He was encouraged not to ask again.....

You'd have thought in these days of IT that someone could do some accurate predictions for training course requirements.
BEagle is online now  
Old 16th Feb 2011, 11:16
  #225 (permalink)  
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,043
Harsh though it may sound, anyone leaving the RAF who hasn't completed the course of training and got his/her wings will be treated by the airlines exactly like any other trainee who hasn't got their licence yet, "Nice to hear from you, contact us again when you have a CPL and Instrument rating". Some of the bigger and better organisations may then take them in and give them a type rating, several organisations may offer them a type rating course that they then have to pay for.

Hopefully the redundancy and resettlement package will help those that want to continue flying get their CPL/IR quite quickly, those with multi crew training and those with rotary wing training are likely to be the first to be employed as their experience is the most relevant to a civvy operation.

Let's hope that the CAA evaluate each application and make some allowances for the training hours flown in the military rather than make them go the full, non-approved course' route, let's also hope there are some jobs out there.
parabellum is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2011, 11:30
  #226 (permalink)  
Red On, Green On
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Between the woods and the water
Age: 20
Posts: 6,487
the redundancy and resettlement package
What terms have the choppees been given? Given that most won't even have a PPL, the cost of a fATPL will be about three years pay for the grads, more for those without degrees. I can't see the RAF handing out anything like that amount.
airborne_artist is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2011, 11:30
  #227 (permalink)  
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sweden
Posts: 425

Many years ago, well 27 anyway, when I joined the RAF I signed a contract. I seem to recall the wording went along the lines of:-

"I agree to serve for a period of 12 years plus 6 years in the reserve or until Her Majesty no longer requires my services."

If I do indeed remember that correctly then it appears that members of the armed forces sign a contract agreeing that at any time their military service can be terminated, or indeed extended, with or without their agreement.

As for exploring other avenues as you mentioned, reduction of hours etc, this is only of any benefit to the employer if the employee is paid by the hour.

If as in the forces they are paid by the day how do you propose to save money?
Avionker is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2011, 11:46
  #228 (permalink)  

Gentleman Aviator
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Teetering Towers - somewhere in the Shires
Age: 70
Posts: 3,385
I cannot see any problems.
I can't comment on FW newt,but co-location certainly wouldn't work for rotary.

Not only is it the (pretty much) exclusive use of LFA9, it's the "Fields & Clearings" of which scores are used in DHFS training. Helo pilots who can only land at airfields aren't much use, and MoD doesn't own many fields, holes in woods,or sides of hills! Many of the local natives are friendly, and (in exchange for a peppercorn rent and an annual "lunch") allow the irreplaceable use of their land.

(impressive CV newt)
teeteringhead is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2011, 12:11
  #229 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 1,329
the redundancy and resettlement package
Judging by the posts on how the line is going to be drawn in the sand as to who stays and who goes (i.e. based on IOT and/or flying reports - with no one actually knowing where the goalposts have moved to) I fear those discharged may fall under the phrase 'Services no longer required - failed to meet the required standard' (or whatever the PC phrase is these days) and will receive next to nothing (or indeed nothing). As far as I can recall until you are CR / 6 months into your first tour you are still effectively under training and there are no "contractual" binds for either side so you can still VW or be SNLR'd. As with all things in the RAF the cheapest option may be the easiest but it is not always the best.

Good luck to those this effects. For those who take a branch change keep plugging away with your requests for a rebranch once the pipeline reopens. The last time there was a pilot shortage (and it is only a matter of time for the next one) they were taking navigators in their early to mid 30s back through the pilot training system
Wrathmonk is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2011, 12:33
  #230 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Behind you...
Posts: 18
All flying training studes are now in the 'Redundancy Field'. Those who are unsuccessful for a re-branch at OASC (pretty much all) get compulsory redundancy.

Out of service date will be Sep 2012, so another 18 months in a blue suit although there is no plan what to do with those affected for those 18 months. Just enough time to wait and see people complete the course you've been choped off. If you want out earlier, VW is an option but there is no incentive to do that.
AngryDave is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2011, 12:38
  #231 (permalink)  
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: SW UK
Posts: 172
Newt: I see from your profile that you do indeed have *some* experience of flying training!
I presume that you don't include OCU/Fs in the training/relocation programme?
A reduction in training numbers could be the chance to consolidate training bases, but this needs to be done in slow-time, to avoid messing up the system even more and costing more money in the long run.
Perhaps some consolidation could be achieved in FW, after all we had JEFTS (tri-service) for a while before the RAF moved out in order to justify keeping UASs at dispersed airbases that are little-used for anything else. I know that UASs are very popular and are considered to give good value etc by most on here.
Also can't agree more with teetering head re: RW, and when a base is in the correct location for role, why move it to then have to go back on detachment?
Not everyone gets to whizz around at high-subsonic speeds to and from training areas!
switch_on_lofty is online now  
Old 16th Feb 2011, 12:54
  #232 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Home
Posts: 177
If you know that you are going to be fired, look for a job, and if you find one, leave! Any apparent monies lost will be recovered later. For sure in any company, especially in an airline, position on the seniority list is everything! Last in first out!!
haltonapp is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2011, 12:59
  #233 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Between Oxon and somewhere else
Posts: 34
Just a rumour, but I have heard of early release from Service with immediate lump sum but being offered in return for pension delayed until 65! As I say it is a rumour, but has anyone heard this?
Winchweight is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2011, 13:22
  #234 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 9
If it's redundancy, could be a can of worms. Crown immunity is a thing of the past. Ab initios expect to be chopped if they fail to reach the standard, or to VW if it isn't for them. That is what is expected.

Mixing this with redundancy to a specific pool of employees in training could be an utter fiasco that will line the pockets of employment lawyers and cost more than it saves.

I PVRd in 2004 and am now in civvy employment....most of us have acquainted ourselves with employment law and redundancy procedures. Employers need to follow procedures to the letter, particularly with such a large pool. Scenarios such as reduced hours, part-time working, sabbaticals etc should be considered.

After all, according to the MoD, Service personnel are 'public sector workers'. Redundancy procedures for the public sector are labyrinthine and usually entail generous separation packages. This will be an utter disaster!

If this is the only answer, the question needs to be questioned....
MrPVRd is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2011, 13:32
  #235 (permalink)  
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,519

Your points about redundancy are well made, but a little overstated.

Our redundancy laws are still way behind those of many other European countries and just as many employees are well-briefed, employers are even more so - especially in the public sector.

Throughout the public sector armies of administrators and employment specialists will be checking every aspect of their respective redundancy processes.

Of course one can never rule out a c*ck up, or some clever spark uncovering a rule that everybody else has missed, but I suspect this will be unlikely. And even if it does happen it will likely be dealt with quietly, out of court and on a one to one.

It will take an almighty oversight for anything to lead to a class action. (never say never though)
The Old Fat One is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2011, 13:34
  #236 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: london
Posts: 16
Would be great if the unfortunate ones could get some form of (permanent!) time off whilst serving out their final 18 months. They could enrol on full-time MA/MSc courses (paid for by themselves probably!) for the September 2011 intake at Universities. They would have completed them by Sept 2012 if they take a 1 year course and might benefit job-market wise from it. Graduating just very shortly after their last pay packet.
bandoe is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2011, 13:37
  #237 (permalink)  
Join Date: May 2004
Location: England
Posts: 476

What happened to the releasing of the above, scheduled for yesterday?
Grabbers is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2011, 13:53
  #238 (permalink)  
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Edinburgh
Posts: 9
Well-briefed on redundancy.....hah!

I've seen my employer go through multiple tranches and they were less than well-briefed. The only reason they haven't been at a tribunal (yet...and to my knowledge) is that those I have known who have spotted glitches in their own case, or indicated willingness to put up a fight have been 'looked after' in some way or another. Of course, many people just accept it and acquiesce, which is the calculated risk on the employer's part.

RAF is required legally, as an employer, to allow reasonable time off for retraining and jobhunting, for those being made redundant.

For those at risk...start consulting lawyers. Maybe collectively.

This could be very expensive.
MrPVRd is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2011, 14:03
  #239 (permalink)  
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Mold
Posts: 155
As far as the SH Force is concerned getting rid of so many trainee pilots has got to rate as on of the most scandalous management strategies ever implemented.

To keep the though put going, it makes more sense to make every Navigator (or whatever they call them now) on SH redundant and replace them with a pilot.

Can't help thinking that there is a bit of, high level, unconscionable protectionism at work here.
xenolith is offline  
Old 16th Feb 2011, 14:18
  #240 (permalink)  
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,492
So, Egypt, Iran, Tunisia and now Libya are now rather more than somewhat on the buffet.....

But hey, let's get rid of our air force and keep giving overseas aid to richer countries....
BEagle is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.