PVR & RoS
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks again for your replies! 
Just waiting for a written job offer before I go into negotiation with my DO - I would have thgought they'd much rather keep someone who wants to stay as, to be honest, I want to leave. I am still beavering away with whatever comes along at work and have 5 secondary duties so it's not like I'm shirking or dodging work!
PTC - for what it's worth I joined as one of the last AEOps and I haven't changed my ToS at any point in my career.
Thanks again gents, have a good weekend!
Just waiting for a written job offer before I go into negotiation with my DO - I would have thgought they'd much rather keep someone who wants to stay as, to be honest, I want to leave. I am still beavering away with whatever comes along at work and have 5 secondary duties so it's not like I'm shirking or dodging work!
PTC - for what it's worth I joined as one of the last AEOps and I haven't changed my ToS at any point in my career.
Thanks again gents, have a good weekend!
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: SH-UK
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PVR before RoS
Good luck getting out ... there are a few guys in a similar boat in the SH world ... happy to go and give a job to someone from ISK but life is never that simple, well not in the RAF at any rate !
Not entirely sure what your DO would be getting out of you in 2 years ? Spend 18 months going through Shawbs and then an OCF to serve 6 months prior to a PVR .... that would be a ridiculous decision ...
Ridiculous decision ? Yep, that fits the current climate, enjoy the training system buddy !!
Not entirely sure what your DO would be getting out of you in 2 years ? Spend 18 months going through Shawbs and then an OCF to serve 6 months prior to a PVR .... that would be a ridiculous decision ...
Ridiculous decision ? Yep, that fits the current climate, enjoy the training system buddy !!
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Right here, right now
Posts: 270
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not entirely sure what your DO would be getting out of you in 2 years ? Spend 18 months going through Shawbs and then an OCF to serve 6 months prior to a PVR .... that would be a ridiculous decision ...
MFC
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Nowhere
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
am now faced with the prospect of having to move down South etc but I'd rather stay in the area I'm in at present as my family is settled, I own my house and I like it up here!
"You sonny, yes you, get up over the top and charge the enemy!!"
"Er, I'd rather not sir, you see I like where I am!"
FFS
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
am I missing something here?
He is saying the career he signed up for has been trashed and now he would like to get out. Moreover, he is querying why would the system keep people in who want out, and chuck out people who want to stay in.
Simples
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Nowhere
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All understood. However, LGAF committed to the RAF. The career he joined up for has not been trashed - just the ac type and role he has been initially trained for. His career has yet to come and will take shape in whatever guise the RAF require. Like all members of the military, his life is (to a great extent) not his own. He is a pawn to be trained, retained (or let go) and used as the Crown sees fit. Part of this is the expectation that one serves wherever the Crown requires us to serv ... for whatever reason. LGAF, nor any member of the miltary, should expect to serve at one location TFN and remain there just because he, or they, like it. Sure, it often happens that some serve for long periods of time in one place and as long as this matches the Service need there is nothing wrong with it - the Service, the individual and the individual's family can all benefit. But the point is, this is not a right, its a bonus.
Simples.
Simples.
LW,
First of all I agree with you. When I joined the RAF many years ago I fully expected to be moved around during my career - indeed that was one of the attractions. I also realised that to a large extent my life was no longer my own.....
However, I offer the following comment - which is a GENEAL one, and may well not apply specifically to LGAF!!!!
Many (but not all) of the youth of today who join the RAF either do not seem to appreciate your point, recognise it, or accept it (perhaps the recruitment world doesn't highly this point adequately, in an effort to keep recruitment numbers up maybe?). Certainly on the airman side there is anecdotal evidence of considerable numbers trying to get posted after trade training to the base nearest to their original home town. Perhaps in some ways this is understandable, that is where their friends/relatives all still live. However, the sense of adventure, desire to see the world, etc, seems to be less alive today than in the past.
I have no solid numbers to back up the comment above, just numerous comments I have both heard personally and read on other forums from some of the "old hands". I'm not trying to pass on some "grumpy old man" comment, or "dis" the youth of today, just offering up an observation that I consider to be genuine.
It is also interesting to note that formal RAF policy seems to be going towards providing "regional stability" for RAF personnel, perhaps in recognition of trends, such as wives working, the desire for stability of childrens education, etc. No doubt it is also seen as a long term cost saving measure - less requirement for CEA, disturbance allowance, military married accommodation (as people are more likely to buy in a n area they think they will be in for the medium/long term), etc.....
First of all I agree with you. When I joined the RAF many years ago I fully expected to be moved around during my career - indeed that was one of the attractions. I also realised that to a large extent my life was no longer my own.....
However, I offer the following comment - which is a GENEAL one, and may well not apply specifically to LGAF!!!!
Many (but not all) of the youth of today who join the RAF either do not seem to appreciate your point, recognise it, or accept it (perhaps the recruitment world doesn't highly this point adequately, in an effort to keep recruitment numbers up maybe?). Certainly on the airman side there is anecdotal evidence of considerable numbers trying to get posted after trade training to the base nearest to their original home town. Perhaps in some ways this is understandable, that is where their friends/relatives all still live. However, the sense of adventure, desire to see the world, etc, seems to be less alive today than in the past.
I have no solid numbers to back up the comment above, just numerous comments I have both heard personally and read on other forums from some of the "old hands". I'm not trying to pass on some "grumpy old man" comment, or "dis" the youth of today, just offering up an observation that I consider to be genuine.
It is also interesting to note that formal RAF policy seems to be going towards providing "regional stability" for RAF personnel, perhaps in recognition of trends, such as wives working, the desire for stability of childrens education, etc. No doubt it is also seen as a long term cost saving measure - less requirement for CEA, disturbance allowance, military married accommodation (as people are more likely to buy in a n area they think they will be in for the medium/long term), etc.....
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like all members of the military, his life is (to a great extent) not his own. He is a pawn to be trained, retained (or let go) and used as the Crown sees fit
And I speak as someone who with loyalty, professionalism and integrity, served for 27 years.
Aside from the fact that Nuremberg invalidated the statement above, servicemen and woman are required to serve within the expectations of theirs terms of service.
There are dozens of options for early release (including negotiating a PVR) and any of them can be invoked without any suggestion that any individual lacks loyalty, integrity or professionalism.
On a moral note, given the events of the past few years, any servicemen who places misguided blind principle above a the hard-headed reality of looking after oneself and ones' loved ones, is tilting towards being a gullible fool.
Lottery Winner,
There are many at Odiham who would love a move, but there is no where to go to. By your logic, the RAF should be obliged to provide somewhere for them to move to.
No?
So we keep someone from leaving because he doesn't want to move, whats next, stopping people from leaving because they can't move?
There are many at Odiham who would love a move, but there is no where to go to. By your logic, the RAF should be obliged to provide somewhere for them to move to.
No?
So we keep someone from leaving because he doesn't want to move, whats next, stopping people from leaving because they can't move?
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Nowhere
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Biggus,
You have made a vlid point. Perhaps expectations are changing and certainly, I do believe the RAF is looking at providing more stability where possible and I also think this is generally a good thing but my point is that such stability is not an absolute right. The Service can, will and must be able to move its people when necessary. I hope LGAF gets his wish, or a nice posting of his choice, but he shouldn't expect it to happen because (and this is reponse to TOFO's post) ...
I know that LGAF's ToS, QRs, or any other reference says 'Thou shalt join the RAF specifically to operate Nimrods and shall spend the rest of your days at RAF Kinloss'.
Terms of Service are as written down, not necessarily what people think they should be. ToS do not specify which station thou shalt serve at.
Gents, clearly opinion will remain divided over this issue. I do not disagree with much of the sentiment expressed. Perhaps some of it can be put down to the 'youth of today' and much more down to many a crass decision taken in the carpeted corridors of Whitehall. I do not know what the current manning numbers are or what they are likely to be. Perhaps LGAF could easily be released without pain to the Service, either now or in the future. I don't know. What I do know is that he does not appear to have the right to do so. I am not saying he should not or not be able to to if the Service need allows. I am saying he does not have the right. No matter what the opinions are of my fellow learned (much more learned than me no doubt) PRuNers are, LGAF does not have the right to leave the RAF if he is indeed subject to his TRoS.
Now, I'm off to see a man about a dog.
You have made a vlid point. Perhaps expectations are changing and certainly, I do believe the RAF is looking at providing more stability where possible and I also think this is generally a good thing but my point is that such stability is not an absolute right. The Service can, will and must be able to move its people when necessary. I hope LGAF gets his wish, or a nice posting of his choice, but he shouldn't expect it to happen because (and this is reponse to TOFO's post) ...
servicemen and woman are required to serve within the expectations of theirs terms of service.
Terms of Service are as written down, not necessarily what people think they should be. ToS do not specify which station thou shalt serve at.
Gents, clearly opinion will remain divided over this issue. I do not disagree with much of the sentiment expressed. Perhaps some of it can be put down to the 'youth of today' and much more down to many a crass decision taken in the carpeted corridors of Whitehall. I do not know what the current manning numbers are or what they are likely to be. Perhaps LGAF could easily be released without pain to the Service, either now or in the future. I don't know. What I do know is that he does not appear to have the right to do so. I am not saying he should not or not be able to to if the Service need allows. I am saying he does not have the right. No matter what the opinions are of my fellow learned (much more learned than me no doubt) PRuNers are, LGAF does not have the right to leave the RAF if he is indeed subject to his TRoS.
Now, I'm off to see a man about a dog.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Nowhere
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are many at Odiham who would love a move, but there is no where to go to. By your logic, the RAF should be obliged to provide somewhere for them to move to.
I suspect their are many people at all sorts of locations who wish to move but are unable to because of the fall out of SDSR or whatever reason. It would be great I am sure of they could move. It would be good if all dreams could come true. What I am saying though, and the real line my logic supports, is that LGAF, or service men/women at Odiham or Benson, or Waddington, or BDS Washington or Lossie or anywhere do not have the right to move just because they want to, nor do they have the right to leave the RAF just because they do not want to move. That's all. Its about the right to. Dotted line and all that.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Great Britain
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst attending a 'career enhancing' course, a presentation by Manning assured the said course members that RAF policy was for a two tier stream career.
One was occupied by the ambitious ones who would go anywhere at anytime and complete any job in return for a career spine that included a promotion ladder for them to climb.
The second career or rather 'job spine' included geographical advantage and long term stability in return for accepting that promotion was not included unless it suited the Service.
This presentation was in 2008 and I have not seen any evidence of such policy being instigated since. In fact as one who would gladly embrace the geographical stability stream, and even accept less pay for the convenience, I have been moved reluctantly three times since!
IMHO I am convinced that SDSR has deleted any hope of such policy ever being implimented. We have dozens of staff without portfolio who would gladly take any job offered. The reduction in posting options due to closure of stations further removes the possibility of success. For sure we will eventually condense to a few 'super bases' which will render any aspiration to be geographically friendly a none starter. In short; the briefing I received was dead in the water however well intended.
One was occupied by the ambitious ones who would go anywhere at anytime and complete any job in return for a career spine that included a promotion ladder for them to climb.
The second career or rather 'job spine' included geographical advantage and long term stability in return for accepting that promotion was not included unless it suited the Service.
This presentation was in 2008 and I have not seen any evidence of such policy being instigated since. In fact as one who would gladly embrace the geographical stability stream, and even accept less pay for the convenience, I have been moved reluctantly three times since!
IMHO I am convinced that SDSR has deleted any hope of such policy ever being implimented. We have dozens of staff without portfolio who would gladly take any job offered. The reduction in posting options due to closure of stations further removes the possibility of success. For sure we will eventually condense to a few 'super bases' which will render any aspiration to be geographically friendly a none starter. In short; the briefing I received was dead in the water however well intended.
nor do they have the right to leave the RAF just because they do not want to move.
So what you are effectively saying is, anyone joining the RAF has no rights whatsoever? Let's make this retention problem a recruitment problem eh?
Have a look at the date mate, the 60/70's are over. People's aspirations have changed, and the RAF is the main cause of this. You cannot walk around recruitment offices handing out glossy brochures promising this that and the other, then not deliver it.
If people aren't happy, you can always keep them against their will as you suggest. But all that happens is that they become bitter and infect those that were generally happy.
Or, you let them walk.........
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Nowhere
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MGD,
Mate, you are not listening.
Clearly you think people have the right, you obviously believe they should have the right and maybe they should have the right. That is not the point. The point is, as I have said, is that they do not have the right. This is not a load of tosh as you say. This is fact. You show me THE policy which says this particular individual has the right.
MGD - are letting your emotions run away with you. I will even go so far as to say that you are right! Perhaps Service men and women should have the right. Alas, tis not the case currently!
LGAF and any other Service person can not simply leave because they want to. Even PVR without a TRoS is not guaranteed. I am afraid the Service holds all (well most) of the cards. You can rant all you wish about what you think should be the case and I am sure you may have much support ... even from me ... but it is simply not the legal position currently. Understand? We all have a view about what should be but sometimes, and in spite of this, we must accept how it actually is. By all means fight to change it but until it is changed, it is the way it is.
Mate, you are not listening.
Clearly you think people have the right, you obviously believe they should have the right and maybe they should have the right. That is not the point. The point is, as I have said, is that they do not have the right. This is not a load of tosh as you say. This is fact. You show me THE policy which says this particular individual has the right.
MGD - are letting your emotions run away with you. I will even go so far as to say that you are right! Perhaps Service men and women should have the right. Alas, tis not the case currently!
LGAF and any other Service person can not simply leave because they want to. Even PVR without a TRoS is not guaranteed. I am afraid the Service holds all (well most) of the cards. You can rant all you wish about what you think should be the case and I am sure you may have much support ... even from me ... but it is simply not the legal position currently. Understand? We all have a view about what should be but sometimes, and in spite of this, we must accept how it actually is. By all means fight to change it but until it is changed, it is the way it is.
Lottery Winner,
I believe your point mate. However, I can stand in front of you and tell you the sun will never set, but we all know it will.
Our differences sum up the RAF right now. There is a yawning gap appearing between what should happen, and what is happening.
I have listened, and you are right; but then again Hitler built the autobahns and they aren't too bad.
Without picking an argument, the RAF has to have a deep look at how they are going to deal with people in the future. The world is changing, and they need to change to.
I won't hold my breath.
I believe your point mate. However, I can stand in front of you and tell you the sun will never set, but we all know it will.
Our differences sum up the RAF right now. There is a yawning gap appearing between what should happen, and what is happening.
I have listened, and you are right; but then again Hitler built the autobahns and they aren't too bad.
Without picking an argument, the RAF has to have a deep look at how they are going to deal with people in the future. The world is changing, and they need to change to.
I won't hold my breath.
