Extra 7000 MoD civvies to go before 2015.
I think we can safely dismiss Choppa as a total fantasist, although I did spend a few minutes trying to work out the last time a terrorist assault force got past gate guards and stormed MOD buildings.
As for the issue of rank - its a really old, and very dull argument built on misunderstanding. The CS has had a rank system since its inception in the late 19th century. The Military insisted on working out what equivalent ranks were because they couldnt understand what an Executive Officer, or a Grade 7 or any other CS rank title were. As such people worked out the rough equivalencies in terms of experience and signing off powers and came up with the current table - but its important to note that the CS didnt adopt the idea of rank off the military, it has always had it.
The military complain about CS that act as if they have rank and I have found some that regard anyone in the CS as being untermensch at all levels - I find this discourteous in the extreme. When working with military or CS peers, I make an effort to respect them, and their position in the hierachy, and treat those senior to me with the respect that is due to people who have worked exceptionally hard to put themselves into positions of trust and authority. I'm sorry that some small minority of Mil seem to be uncomfortable with the idea that other organisations outside of the Military have hierachies too, and that its possible to work out roughly how senior people in those hierachies would be if they were in the mil.
I've had Military line managers and I've had civilian line managers in my time and I've treated both with equal respect. Similarly I've managed Civ and Mil staff and done the same. Yes you get a tiny (and I mean tiny) number of CS who walt it up in a Mil environment and try to be more Mil than Mil. By all means slap them down verbally, and remind them that they are CS and not Mil, but at the end of the day, are people so insecure in their own roles, that they cannot accept that they are working in part of a wider structure which has 4 distinct rank structures and career structures (RN/RAF/Army/CS) and that its entirely possible for people from all 4, including civilian, to exercise positions of authority within that? I find that quite worrying to be honest.
If the idea that working with Civvies who have a career progression and internal rank structure as part of a hierachical organisation causes you to get stressed, then thats a bit worrying in my book.
As for the issue of rank - its a really old, and very dull argument built on misunderstanding. The CS has had a rank system since its inception in the late 19th century. The Military insisted on working out what equivalent ranks were because they couldnt understand what an Executive Officer, or a Grade 7 or any other CS rank title were. As such people worked out the rough equivalencies in terms of experience and signing off powers and came up with the current table - but its important to note that the CS didnt adopt the idea of rank off the military, it has always had it.
The military complain about CS that act as if they have rank and I have found some that regard anyone in the CS as being untermensch at all levels - I find this discourteous in the extreme. When working with military or CS peers, I make an effort to respect them, and their position in the hierachy, and treat those senior to me with the respect that is due to people who have worked exceptionally hard to put themselves into positions of trust and authority. I'm sorry that some small minority of Mil seem to be uncomfortable with the idea that other organisations outside of the Military have hierachies too, and that its possible to work out roughly how senior people in those hierachies would be if they were in the mil.
I've had Military line managers and I've had civilian line managers in my time and I've treated both with equal respect. Similarly I've managed Civ and Mil staff and done the same. Yes you get a tiny (and I mean tiny) number of CS who walt it up in a Mil environment and try to be more Mil than Mil. By all means slap them down verbally, and remind them that they are CS and not Mil, but at the end of the day, are people so insecure in their own roles, that they cannot accept that they are working in part of a wider structure which has 4 distinct rank structures and career structures (RN/RAF/Army/CS) and that its entirely possible for people from all 4, including civilian, to exercise positions of authority within that? I find that quite worrying to be honest.
If the idea that working with Civvies who have a career progression and internal rank structure as part of a hierachical organisation causes you to get stressed, then thats a bit worrying in my book.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: 50'11N 004' 16W
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes you get a tiny (and I mean tiny) number of CS who walt it up in a Mil environment and try to be more Mil than Mil. By all means slap them down verbally, and remind them that they are CS and not Mil, but at the end of the day, are people so insecure in their own roles, that they cannot accept that they are working in part of a wider structure which has 4 distinct rank structures and career structures (RN/RAF/Army/CS) and that its entirely possible for people from all 4, including civilian, to exercise positions of authority within that? I find that quite worrying to be honest.
Was / is it only certain naval bases who have to put up with this?
How many roles in RAF / Army bases are filled by people with zero capability but automatically qualified by disability?
Naval bases are rife with it. No senior would ever put their head `above the parapet though. Way too risky.
"And what about the ten-percenters? The 10% disabled the MOD had to recruit due to quotas...?"
What on earth are you talking about? There is no such quota, its just an urban myth.
If you go to this link - http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/F1718...he_mod_rpt.pdf and read Page 74 onwards, you'll immediately find that only 5% of the MOD in total defined themselves as possesing some form of disability, versus nearly 11% of the UK workforce as a whole. There is also no magic policy for automatic appointment of people with disabilities, despite what the dockyard buzz suggests.
There are disabled people in service, if they can do the job then thats good for them. I think a hell of a lot of serving amputees would prove that they can do the job as well as anyone else.
What on earth are you talking about? There is no such quota, its just an urban myth.
If you go to this link - http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/F1718...he_mod_rpt.pdf and read Page 74 onwards, you'll immediately find that only 5% of the MOD in total defined themselves as possesing some form of disability, versus nearly 11% of the UK workforce as a whole. There is also no magic policy for automatic appointment of people with disabilities, despite what the dockyard buzz suggests.
There are disabled people in service, if they can do the job then thats good for them. I think a hell of a lot of serving amputees would prove that they can do the job as well as anyone else.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: in the mess
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Topsy, a bit of tongue in cheek banter...
"If the MoD CS has no value and you dont need them I hope you dont expect to:
-be fed and watered - CRL
-receive any pay / allowances - JPA
-have your accommodation concerns investigated - DHE/MHS
-be supplied with uniform / equipment - would be nice!
-have individuals working on designs for the latest high technology equipment - like the experts who manage that in Abbey Wood?
-be able to have complaints investigated outside the chain of command on Ministers behalf - kept that one hidden, didn't know about that..
-be able to return home from deployment in an emergency - another super-slick experience...
-have your family /dependants supported whilst you are deployed / or if taken ill or if you should die in service - not sure any CS helped my missus out while I was away...
- receive a pension / medals - after much re-photocopying of logbooks after the first copies were lost!
Just some of the valuable rolls MoD CS perform"
No really, what would we do without you? Cheers for carrying out all those 'rolls'.
It's not personal, I am not saying all those things are your fault. However, your examples were poorly chosen mate!
"If the MoD CS has no value and you dont need them I hope you dont expect to:
-be fed and watered - CRL
-receive any pay / allowances - JPA
-have your accommodation concerns investigated - DHE/MHS
-be supplied with uniform / equipment - would be nice!
-have individuals working on designs for the latest high technology equipment - like the experts who manage that in Abbey Wood?
-be able to have complaints investigated outside the chain of command on Ministers behalf - kept that one hidden, didn't know about that..
-be able to return home from deployment in an emergency - another super-slick experience...
-have your family /dependants supported whilst you are deployed / or if taken ill or if you should die in service - not sure any CS helped my missus out while I was away...
- receive a pension / medals - after much re-photocopying of logbooks after the first copies were lost!
Just some of the valuable rolls MoD CS perform"
No really, what would we do without you? Cheers for carrying out all those 'rolls'.
It's not personal, I am not saying all those things are your fault. However, your examples were poorly chosen mate!
You do realise all the examples you tried to counter there are citing organisations staffed by CS?
the whole point of the CS is not that it is one monolithic organisation, but that it has people across the piste working in a wide range of areas.
Some of them do very well, others aren't as good - but the problem that I find with the Military is that there is an incredible ability to shrug shoulders and make out that everything that goes wrong with Defence, without exception at times, seems to be the fault of the Civvies and not their own service comrades.
By all means blame the CS when they directly screw up, but I am sick and tired of people trying to push blame where it is often not deserved. Having watched military officers take appalling decisions over the years, and then heard public criticisms of CS for taking said decisions, the abrogation of leadership at all levels in the military when it comes to manning up and accepting responsibility is appalling. I'm often seen as an apologist for the CS - I'm not, and I am a huge critic of much of its internal processes, but equally I am very fed up with the bashing that it gets day in day out by people who are blaming the CS for things that are often nothing to do with them at all.
the whole point of the CS is not that it is one monolithic organisation, but that it has people across the piste working in a wide range of areas.
Some of them do very well, others aren't as good - but the problem that I find with the Military is that there is an incredible ability to shrug shoulders and make out that everything that goes wrong with Defence, without exception at times, seems to be the fault of the Civvies and not their own service comrades.
By all means blame the CS when they directly screw up, but I am sick and tired of people trying to push blame where it is often not deserved. Having watched military officers take appalling decisions over the years, and then heard public criticisms of CS for taking said decisions, the abrogation of leadership at all levels in the military when it comes to manning up and accepting responsibility is appalling. I'm often seen as an apologist for the CS - I'm not, and I am a huge critic of much of its internal processes, but equally I am very fed up with the bashing that it gets day in day out by people who are blaming the CS for things that are often nothing to do with them at all.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: 50'11N 004' 16W
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What on earth are you talking about?
I have empirical.
Watching a one-armed bandit trying to bollock one of my lads for not signing the duties chit on time after he'd just come back off compassionate really made my mind up. He "left" shortly after. Yes, a few of these types have really pissed me off. Just because they may have bits missing does not make them decent people. None were / are vets either.
"Ever been based at Collingwood? Even if my observations do not correllate with published stats..."
Oh gods yes - and I still strongly doubt that 10% of the C'WOOD civvy workforce is disabled.
"Watching a one-armed bandit trying to bollock one of my lads for not signing the duties chit on time after he'd just come back off compassionate"
Did he know he'd come off compassionate? Was he in the lads reporting chain? Why is coming off compassionate on this occasion a failure to sign the duties chit - Sticking my DO hat on here, I'm all for giving the lads leniency if circumstances call for it - but can you explain more - did he miss it while on leave, and if so, why did you or one of his oppos not sort it for him with a quiet word? If it happened when he was back, and he was fit for duties, why shouldnt he be bollocked for not doing something he should have done?
Sorry, but without more info there, your cause and effect seems a bit odd.
Oh gods yes - and I still strongly doubt that 10% of the C'WOOD civvy workforce is disabled.
"Watching a one-armed bandit trying to bollock one of my lads for not signing the duties chit on time after he'd just come back off compassionate"
Did he know he'd come off compassionate? Was he in the lads reporting chain? Why is coming off compassionate on this occasion a failure to sign the duties chit - Sticking my DO hat on here, I'm all for giving the lads leniency if circumstances call for it - but can you explain more - did he miss it while on leave, and if so, why did you or one of his oppos not sort it for him with a quiet word? If it happened when he was back, and he was fit for duties, why shouldnt he be bollocked for not doing something he should have done?
Sorry, but without more info there, your cause and effect seems a bit odd.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: arrrrrrrgh
Age: 55
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jimlad this is a military forum, not a civvy service forum, that's why it says MILITARY AIRCREW and not CIVIL SERVICE. If you are concerned for your job, how about you mosey on down to your boring civil service mates and discuss it there. We really don't give a stuff about you lot. No really we don’t.
You're right - good job I hold the Queens Commission then really isnt' it! Besides, its also for all of us who are the backroom boys, and speaking as someone who has spent a long time doing some very operationally relevant J2/3/5 stuff for various RAF units in dark blue uniform and out of it in a range of operational theatres, I'd like to think that I qualify as a backroom bod - albeit a light deprived, white sock wearing geek ;-)
ex - I've done about 30 months at MWS and have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. I can think of a couple of disabled people working there, at least one of whom was broken by the RN. To claim that 10% of non-mil working there are disabled is bollocks.
Whilst I've no real love of Flagship, they are keeping the RN alive. Paid f*ck all, we expect them to use their 22yr's knowledge to teach us the basics and then let us take friday afternoon off and finish at 1430 on a Thursday.
Really - I'm pretty sure you wouldn't leave the ground with the support of the Civil Service, so why don't you accept they have an equal part of being in this forum?
As for the rank equivalence - the only time I've seen it used in anger was as a limit of delegation and responsibility i.e. write-off powers, signing of contracts, signing of reports.
Whilst I've no real love of Flagship, they are keeping the RN alive. Paid f*ck all, we expect them to use their 22yr's knowledge to teach us the basics and then let us take friday afternoon off and finish at 1430 on a Thursday.
Really - I'm pretty sure you wouldn't leave the ground with the support of the Civil Service, so why don't you accept they have an equal part of being in this forum?
As for the rank equivalence - the only time I've seen it used in anger was as a limit of delegation and responsibility i.e. write-off powers, signing of contracts, signing of reports.
"An Air Cadet commission doesn't really count"
Really aims for the bite, he shoots and he misses the mark (point?) so much that it lands in the stands, in the ACMs G&T, cue hats on interview the following day
Really aims for the bite, he shoots and he misses the mark (point?) so much that it lands in the stands, in the ACMs G&T, cue hats on interview the following day
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: arrrrrrrgh
Age: 55
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm pretty sure you wouldn't leave the ground with the support of the Civil Service
I think you meant to say " I'm pretty sure you wouldn't leave the ground withOUT the support of the Civil Service".
Whoops. I love it when somebody inadvertently tells the truth.
Jimlad. I got the wrong cadet force. I meant the Sea Cadets.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sad that some people here feel the need to start throwing insults about the cadet forces around in order to try and make a cheap point. I've never been a member of the cadet forces but have huge respect for those adults who give up their spare time to help kids out. Not sure why people think that calling someone a cadet volunteer helps the debate but I hope it makes you feel better.
Seldom
You haven't read the forum description ie "back room boys and girls". Civvy bedwetters......pathetic!
Chopa
Your point about mil guys doing the job that the CS do is simply untrue. How many mil guys are qualified to conduct research in explosives, nuclear weapon modelling, aerodynamics, advanced electronics etc. Sure these guys and gals aren't combat personnel but the guys on the front line cannot do their specialist jobs either.
Jimlad1
I agree entirely. In my experience it was nearly always the mil guys who had an issue with CS equivalent rank. Some chaps had such chip on their shoulder about working with civvies. I must stress the vast majority were consummate professionals who understood that a lot of MOD personnel worked hard to make their kit safer and more effective.
Lastly, those making fun of the cadet instructors will almost certainly be the same morons that complain that the general public don't understand the military!
You haven't read the forum description ie "back room boys and girls". Civvy bedwetters......pathetic!
Chopa
Your point about mil guys doing the job that the CS do is simply untrue. How many mil guys are qualified to conduct research in explosives, nuclear weapon modelling, aerodynamics, advanced electronics etc. Sure these guys and gals aren't combat personnel but the guys on the front line cannot do their specialist jobs either.
Jimlad1
I agree entirely. In my experience it was nearly always the mil guys who had an issue with CS equivalent rank. Some chaps had such chip on their shoulder about working with civvies. I must stress the vast majority were consummate professionals who understood that a lot of MOD personnel worked hard to make their kit safer and more effective.
Lastly, those making fun of the cadet instructors will almost certainly be the same morons that complain that the general public don't understand the military!
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BBK,
I have read it and to me it's fairly clear in it's meaning however its a real moot point as I could not give a rats arse who posts here, and rightly so as it's not my site and we have Mods to supervise that but if you interpret
Military Aircrew A forum for the professionals who fly the non-civilian hardware, and the backroom boys and girls without whom nothing would leave the ground. Army, Navy and Airforcesof the World, all equally welcome here.
to included the CS as they qualify under the "backroom boys rule then you might as well add bin men, postmen and women, BT engineers, DHL drivers etc etc etc as without them nothing would leave the ground
I have read it and to me it's fairly clear in it's meaning however its a real moot point as I could not give a rats arse who posts here, and rightly so as it's not my site and we have Mods to supervise that but if you interpret
Military Aircrew A forum for the professionals who fly the non-civilian hardware, and the backroom boys and girls without whom nothing would leave the ground. Army, Navy and Airforcesof the World, all equally welcome here.
to included the CS as they qualify under the "backroom boys rule then you might as well add bin men, postmen and women, BT engineers, DHL drivers etc etc etc as without them nothing would leave the ground
Annoyed - this is a grown-up discussions between grown-ups. Now go to your room!
I think that this cull of civil servants is missing the point. Over the last 20 years, progressive out-sourcing of support services through PFIs, MACs etc has seen thousands of civil servants TUPE'd to other employerd, who continue to run punitively expensive contracts set against contracted minimum manning levels. As many of use predicted at the time, these contracts would work whilst the ex-rankers and ex civil servants remained in the same or similar posts, but progressive retirement and changes of TACOS has meant that the minimum manning requirement has been replaced, de facto, by the minimum wage requirement (just visit any contracted out mess or supply sqn to see what I mean). These are the civilians who unfairly ive many of the Civil Servants a bad name.
However, some years ago I had an inspection function in several of the HM Dockyards. Talk about lead-swinging, especially north o' the border. There were a significant percentage of civil servants who clearly would be unable to cut it outside the protective cocoon of the civil service. Babcocks sorted that out when they took over Rosyth Royal Dockyard in 1997, although some key services have remained a civil service function, to meet compliance requirements. Correct me if I am wrong, but Flagship is a PFI - and therefore the staff are not civil servants?
Anyway, the civil service does not simply do admin, as implied by a numbe rof posters. They provide the high level policy and advisory functions in the MOD, scientific expertise within DSTl - and other departments, some air traffic services, fire-fighting, MOD Policing, MDGS, statisitical services (DASA - a bunch of good eggs)...I could go on.
I think that this cull of civil servants is missing the point. Over the last 20 years, progressive out-sourcing of support services through PFIs, MACs etc has seen thousands of civil servants TUPE'd to other employerd, who continue to run punitively expensive contracts set against contracted minimum manning levels. As many of use predicted at the time, these contracts would work whilst the ex-rankers and ex civil servants remained in the same or similar posts, but progressive retirement and changes of TACOS has meant that the minimum manning requirement has been replaced, de facto, by the minimum wage requirement (just visit any contracted out mess or supply sqn to see what I mean). These are the civilians who unfairly ive many of the Civil Servants a bad name.
However, some years ago I had an inspection function in several of the HM Dockyards. Talk about lead-swinging, especially north o' the border. There were a significant percentage of civil servants who clearly would be unable to cut it outside the protective cocoon of the civil service. Babcocks sorted that out when they took over Rosyth Royal Dockyard in 1997, although some key services have remained a civil service function, to meet compliance requirements. Correct me if I am wrong, but Flagship is a PFI - and therefore the staff are not civil servants?
Anyway, the civil service does not simply do admin, as implied by a numbe rof posters. They provide the high level policy and advisory functions in the MOD, scientific expertise within DSTl - and other departments, some air traffic services, fire-fighting, MOD Policing, MDGS, statisitical services (DASA - a bunch of good eggs)...I could go on.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Aylesbury
Age: 58
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why is getting rid of the CS the most cost effective option to the taxpayer? CS wage bill is approx £3Bn per year, the armed forces wage bill is approx £8 Bn per year. 60% of the CS earn under £26K per year - in the armed forces any at the rank of Cpl or above earns that. CS also do not attract any form of allowances or myriad of other benefits like cheap housing, subsidised gyms etc.
So effectively, it would appear that its been worked out that either "it", whatever "it" may be, need either not be done at all, be done by someone else in addition to whatever he/she is doing, or that someone else in a far away land can do it cheaper. Its effectively looking like a race to the bottom. The main difference that has been highlighted although it then opens up a completely different can of worms is that every single one of those mil adminers, suppliers, caterers, drivers, etc were "soldiers first, tradesmen second". Now, I readily accept that such a posture was threat dependent and very much a cold war footing that has now gone, or is percieved to be no more. Both sides could - I'm not necessarily saying they do, but they could - see increasing civilianisation/militarisation as the thin end of the wedge. I try to look at it dispassionately - because the mil didnt have their own internal IT support/project teams that could bring on major IT projects, or support major systems that were deployable, for the best part of seven years, it gave me civilian work as a contractor. I did however, find it sad and not a tad ironic that the organisation that taught me so much about quality procedures, the value of good documentation, the value of IT operational discipline which I have subsequently found absolutely nowhere else, not even amongst global multinational bluechip firms and most definately not among the outsourcing community - seemed to have shrugged off all of that experience quite willingly and never looked back.
More to the point much of the work of the CS is either very admin like in nature, so it does seem a little pointless to employ legions of forces personnel to do a job that could be done by a civvy for a third of the price (my old Cpl in London was living in a Canary Wharf flat, with a free travel card and return trips home every week - doing the same job that an E2 civil servant could have done for £14K per year with no perks and same hours).
Said E2 was very unlikely though to be sent to the Falklands or to Iraq or Afghan or anywhere else though. It depends on what you want. If all anyones bothered about is the cheapest arse to fill a seat rather than the quality of said arse or any other factor, it can hardly be surprising that those looking to hire said arses may find a much cheaper source of them abroad or through an outsourcer. No-one has an exclusive right to guaranteed employment any more. Those days went with the bubonic plague.
As for the work - given that many CS are rocket scientists etc, where do you propose to get the brains trust from to deliver overnight the deep expertise needed to keep places like DIS or DSTL running? Or do you think it makes sense to recruit thousands of extra military teachers and security guards and canteen assistants, dockyard workers, crane operators etc.
But thats a kind of "after the event" though, isnt it? We could equally ask, and I dare say others already have, what about when the carriers come in, where are you going to get the experience to teach the new lot carrier landings, deck procedures, etc when all these skills have been lost? Or do you think that well, sod them, they were only expendable military anyway? Thats their problem... Or do you address it in the logical way of either a) dont completely lose the capability in the first place or b) get someone in to take the systems on, train the trainers and develop the appropriate training pipeline to supply the requirement. Not really sure what you're getting at here, JL.
The total bill to the UK for replacing the MOD CS with Mil would add several billion per year in order to put Mil into jobs which are being done well by trained civilians for half - third of the price. In what way is this value for money?
Depends on what you want to use the mil for. Depends what the strategic need is. That must be prime above all else, even treasury led demands for austerity. It can be argued that if all you're bothered about is doing it cheaply and you cant be arsed who does it, you end up with a situation where you outsource your AAR capability to a firm who wont fly into war zones, even ones without an active air threat, which is the precise place you need such a force multiplier in the first place.
And you're right, we do and should work alongside each other side by side, both have so much to offer to the overall picture. But there is no point either side getting precious about "because I do it cheaper/better, I'm more valuable than you". You're right, that kind of thing gets us nowhere.
But in the race to the bottom, everyone f*****d...
So effectively, it would appear that its been worked out that either "it", whatever "it" may be, need either not be done at all, be done by someone else in addition to whatever he/she is doing, or that someone else in a far away land can do it cheaper. Its effectively looking like a race to the bottom. The main difference that has been highlighted although it then opens up a completely different can of worms is that every single one of those mil adminers, suppliers, caterers, drivers, etc were "soldiers first, tradesmen second". Now, I readily accept that such a posture was threat dependent and very much a cold war footing that has now gone, or is percieved to be no more. Both sides could - I'm not necessarily saying they do, but they could - see increasing civilianisation/militarisation as the thin end of the wedge. I try to look at it dispassionately - because the mil didnt have their own internal IT support/project teams that could bring on major IT projects, or support major systems that were deployable, for the best part of seven years, it gave me civilian work as a contractor. I did however, find it sad and not a tad ironic that the organisation that taught me so much about quality procedures, the value of good documentation, the value of IT operational discipline which I have subsequently found absolutely nowhere else, not even amongst global multinational bluechip firms and most definately not among the outsourcing community - seemed to have shrugged off all of that experience quite willingly and never looked back.
More to the point much of the work of the CS is either very admin like in nature, so it does seem a little pointless to employ legions of forces personnel to do a job that could be done by a civvy for a third of the price (my old Cpl in London was living in a Canary Wharf flat, with a free travel card and return trips home every week - doing the same job that an E2 civil servant could have done for £14K per year with no perks and same hours).
Said E2 was very unlikely though to be sent to the Falklands or to Iraq or Afghan or anywhere else though. It depends on what you want. If all anyones bothered about is the cheapest arse to fill a seat rather than the quality of said arse or any other factor, it can hardly be surprising that those looking to hire said arses may find a much cheaper source of them abroad or through an outsourcer. No-one has an exclusive right to guaranteed employment any more. Those days went with the bubonic plague.
As for the work - given that many CS are rocket scientists etc, where do you propose to get the brains trust from to deliver overnight the deep expertise needed to keep places like DIS or DSTL running? Or do you think it makes sense to recruit thousands of extra military teachers and security guards and canteen assistants, dockyard workers, crane operators etc.
But thats a kind of "after the event" though, isnt it? We could equally ask, and I dare say others already have, what about when the carriers come in, where are you going to get the experience to teach the new lot carrier landings, deck procedures, etc when all these skills have been lost? Or do you think that well, sod them, they were only expendable military anyway? Thats their problem... Or do you address it in the logical way of either a) dont completely lose the capability in the first place or b) get someone in to take the systems on, train the trainers and develop the appropriate training pipeline to supply the requirement. Not really sure what you're getting at here, JL.
The total bill to the UK for replacing the MOD CS with Mil would add several billion per year in order to put Mil into jobs which are being done well by trained civilians for half - third of the price. In what way is this value for money?
Depends on what you want to use the mil for. Depends what the strategic need is. That must be prime above all else, even treasury led demands for austerity. It can be argued that if all you're bothered about is doing it cheaply and you cant be arsed who does it, you end up with a situation where you outsource your AAR capability to a firm who wont fly into war zones, even ones without an active air threat, which is the precise place you need such a force multiplier in the first place.
And you're right, we do and should work alongside each other side by side, both have so much to offer to the overall picture. But there is no point either side getting precious about "because I do it cheaper/better, I'm more valuable than you". You're right, that kind of thing gets us nowhere.
But in the race to the bottom, everyone f*****d...
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Some CS are really sharp and some may be sharp but not allowed free rein.
Some years ago a CS in Harrogate rang me up at ISK and mentioned that a particular stores item (one that went bang) had had nil consumption in the past year or more. She had a standing order did I wish her to place the order or suspend it?
She had bypassed her CoC, Strike Command and 18 Gp and rung me up, a lowly flt lt in wg weapons. I investgated, found out why there was nil consumption and duly cancelled the purchase.
Now had her initiative been stifled then shedloads of money would have been wasted.
Some years ago a CS in Harrogate rang me up at ISK and mentioned that a particular stores item (one that went bang) had had nil consumption in the past year or more. She had a standing order did I wish her to place the order or suspend it?
She had bypassed her CoC, Strike Command and 18 Gp and rung me up, a lowly flt lt in wg weapons. I investgated, found out why there was nil consumption and duly cancelled the purchase.
Now had her initiative been stifled then shedloads of money would have been wasted.