Extra 7000 MoD civvies to go before 2015.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: 50'11N 004' 16W
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
x - 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.
My other observation was some of the most difficult to deal with civilians were the disabled ones. Senior officers climbed over each other to be seen to defend them if any complaints were raised. I know of one notable incident where Collingwood was left without half it's duty watch one weekend due to a cock-up that was swiftly brushed under the table.
Regardless of my disabled in Collingwood claim, the fact remains that scores of civvies are on disproportionately large salaries for the actual roles and responsibilities they have. Many of the jobs were previously covered in existing shore-based job specs and duty watch commitments.
ex-M, so you made it all up, relied on "experience" and one or two incidents. I'm willing to bet at least 50p that every civvy in MWS is paid less than the Service Person they work opposite to....
Apologies to the mods as I'm going off thread here.
Seldom
You make no sense at all. If CS staff are not considered back room boys and girls then who are you talking about? Mil guys who are doing a support function in the same air conditioned office in town? Your point about postmen, dhl drivers etc being allowed to post is laughable if not plain stupid. These people, not that I want to denigrate anyone's job, were not involved in getting things like NVGs into service. My old department at the RAE was although it wasn't my field as such. Also, this thread IS about MOD civvies so you think it inappropriate for these "bedwetters", as you call them, to post on this topic and that is undemocratic if nothing else. You do understand this concept don't you? It's what the MOD is meant to be defending.
One of my jobs in the MOD was conducting flight trials on front line squadrons. The vast majority of the guys I met were happy to help and were consummate professionals in doing so. A few would take an added interest and they were great for us as they would provide us feedback. We always treated our hosts with respect and I enjoyed much (alcoholic ) hospitality in that time. However, there would sometimes be an idiot who would say our work wasn't important, couldn't be justified. My team would write these guys off as knobs and often it became obvious that the he was also the sqn ****!
I remain very pro MOD and in particular pro RAF as my father and uncle both served in the mob. I wouldn't be surprised if you were in nappies when the old man was a Boy Entrant at Locking in 1949.
In summary these MOD civvies are on the same side as their uniformed
counterparts and so a little consideration for their plight would be in order. I guarantee they won't take any pleasure in cutbacks to front line staff.
Seldom
You make no sense at all. If CS staff are not considered back room boys and girls then who are you talking about? Mil guys who are doing a support function in the same air conditioned office in town? Your point about postmen, dhl drivers etc being allowed to post is laughable if not plain stupid. These people, not that I want to denigrate anyone's job, were not involved in getting things like NVGs into service. My old department at the RAE was although it wasn't my field as such. Also, this thread IS about MOD civvies so you think it inappropriate for these "bedwetters", as you call them, to post on this topic and that is undemocratic if nothing else. You do understand this concept don't you? It's what the MOD is meant to be defending.
One of my jobs in the MOD was conducting flight trials on front line squadrons. The vast majority of the guys I met were happy to help and were consummate professionals in doing so. A few would take an added interest and they were great for us as they would provide us feedback. We always treated our hosts with respect and I enjoyed much (alcoholic ) hospitality in that time. However, there would sometimes be an idiot who would say our work wasn't important, couldn't be justified. My team would write these guys off as knobs and often it became obvious that the he was also the sqn ****!
I remain very pro MOD and in particular pro RAF as my father and uncle both served in the mob. I wouldn't be surprised if you were in nappies when the old man was a Boy Entrant at Locking in 1949.
In summary these MOD civvies are on the same side as their uniformed
counterparts and so a little consideration for their plight would be in order. I guarantee they won't take any pleasure in cutbacks to front line staff.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, Very Bitter and Twisted aren't we, ex_m.
alfred says it like it is/was [from my memories] the cobbled old brown dustcoated civvie was once quite like yourself, ex_m, he just got a bit "unlucky" in the job.
alfred says it like it is/was [from my memories] the cobbled old brown dustcoated civvie was once quite like yourself, ex_m, he just got a bit "unlucky" in the job.
However, there would sometimes be an idiot who would say our work wasn't important, couldn't be justified. My team would write these guys off as knobs and often it became obvious that the he was also the sqn ****!
I suggest that anyone who thinks its OK to write "We really don't give a stuff about you lot. No really we don’t." neatly falls into this category.
They are an embarrassing (to the RAF) minority, thankfully.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: 50'11N 004' 16W
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alfred,
A bit harsh I think. No, I'm not "making it up". I don't think the MOD actually have published figures on the cost effectiveness of civvies taking on roles in shore bases though.
My point has been the disproportionate amount paid in relation to duties & responsibilities held.
Even if one was on 13k for doing what was normally covered by a buffers party and junior member of the duty watch it's too much.
A bit harsh I think. No, I'm not "making it up". I don't think the MOD actually have published figures on the cost effectiveness of civvies taking on roles in shore bases though.
My point has been the disproportionate amount paid in relation to duties & responsibilities held.
Even if one was on 13k for doing what was normally covered by a buffers party and junior member of the duty watch it's too much.
While I sympathise with the idea that civvies are more expensive than forces - its actually the other way round.
If you play around with DASA statistics, you'll find out that about 70% of the entire MOD civil services (i.e. pretty much everyone up to, and including junior bands of Grade C2 - which is mid level management) earns £26K per year or under.
By contrast, pretty much everyone in the armed forces over the rank of Cpl earns £26K per year or more (which is roughly 80%). This figure does not include the not insignificant allowances package available across the rank spectrum.
So putting a junior CS on the duty watch immediately generates significant savings and frees up a trained sailor to go and do something more useful and valuable than sit in the gatehouse. Thats why the MPGS exists, in order to get useful manpower off the gate and either getting down time or doing more useful work.
I would also point out that the Levene review noted that the Forces are often misemployed in jobs which don't require the levels of skills, training and cost that they require, and actually recommended an enlargement to the size of the MOD CS to put much cheaper CS into jobs to free up forces manpower to do more useful work.
I am afraid that I do not consider the 'duty watch' at COLLINGWOOD to be a particularly challenging task (and I've done my fair share of OOD duties in rig at major shore bases). If the MOD can save money, keep sailors off gash duties and free up bodies to ease pressure elsewhere, like in HERRICK, then thats a good thing in my book.
If you play around with DASA statistics, you'll find out that about 70% of the entire MOD civil services (i.e. pretty much everyone up to, and including junior bands of Grade C2 - which is mid level management) earns £26K per year or under.
By contrast, pretty much everyone in the armed forces over the rank of Cpl earns £26K per year or more (which is roughly 80%). This figure does not include the not insignificant allowances package available across the rank spectrum.
So putting a junior CS on the duty watch immediately generates significant savings and frees up a trained sailor to go and do something more useful and valuable than sit in the gatehouse. Thats why the MPGS exists, in order to get useful manpower off the gate and either getting down time or doing more useful work.
I would also point out that the Levene review noted that the Forces are often misemployed in jobs which don't require the levels of skills, training and cost that they require, and actually recommended an enlargement to the size of the MOD CS to put much cheaper CS into jobs to free up forces manpower to do more useful work.
I am afraid that I do not consider the 'duty watch' at COLLINGWOOD to be a particularly challenging task (and I've done my fair share of OOD duties in rig at major shore bases). If the MOD can save money, keep sailors off gash duties and free up bodies to ease pressure elsewhere, like in HERRICK, then thats a good thing in my book.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: 50'11N 004' 16W
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see your point Jimlad but in many instances (from what I have seen) it did not work that way Wrt freeing up bods for other, more worthwhile duties/tasks.
In the case of Collingwood it simply led to a more bloated duty watch in many cases (standby duties). It may very well free up more people at command level, allowing seniors to devote more time to more important tasks but lower down it eases little.
If the intention was to free up bods for other tasks then how come it doesn't include weekends?
In the case of Collingwood it simply led to a more bloated duty watch in many cases (standby duties). It may very well free up more people at command level, allowing seniors to devote more time to more important tasks but lower down it eases little.
If the intention was to free up bods for other tasks then how come it doesn't include weekends?
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apologies to the mods as I'm going off thread here.
Seldom
You make no sense at all. If CS staff are not considered back room boys and girls then who are you talking about?I think the clue is in the forum heading, the bit where it says Navy, Army and Airforces of the world , the bit where it also makes no mention of civilians Mil guys who are doing a support function in the same air conditioned office in town? Yes as they are military so posting on a military forum seems to be a right and proper thing to doYour point about postmen, dhl drivers etc being allowed to post is laughable if not plain stupid. No it's notThese people, not that I want to denigrate anyone's job, were not involved in getting things like NVGs into service. No but they are involved in delivering said items, and for further deliveries of replacement items and associated spares etc etc which using your logic entitles them in exactly the same way as you to post in hereMy old department at the RAE was although it wasn't my field as such. Also, this thread IS about MOD civvies so you think it inappropriate for these "bedwetters", as you call them, to post on this topic and that is undemocratic if nothing else.It's a military thread and it was suggested by another that civilians do not meet the entrance criteria, I happen to agree but as it's not my site I fully accept the site owners moderation of the military forum You do understand this concept don't you? Clearly I doIt's what the MOD is meant to be defending.
Seldom
You make no sense at all. If CS staff are not considered back room boys and girls then who are you talking about?I think the clue is in the forum heading, the bit where it says Navy, Army and Airforces of the world , the bit where it also makes no mention of civilians Mil guys who are doing a support function in the same air conditioned office in town? Yes as they are military so posting on a military forum seems to be a right and proper thing to doYour point about postmen, dhl drivers etc being allowed to post is laughable if not plain stupid. No it's notThese people, not that I want to denigrate anyone's job, were not involved in getting things like NVGs into service. No but they are involved in delivering said items, and for further deliveries of replacement items and associated spares etc etc which using your logic entitles them in exactly the same way as you to post in hereMy old department at the RAE was although it wasn't my field as such. Also, this thread IS about MOD civvies so you think it inappropriate for these "bedwetters", as you call them, to post on this topic and that is undemocratic if nothing else.It's a military thread and it was suggested by another that civilians do not meet the entrance criteria, I happen to agree but as it's not my site I fully accept the site owners moderation of the military forum You do understand this concept don't you? Clearly I doIt's what the MOD is meant to be defending.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SOSL,
You can read the forum entrance criteria for yourself and make your own judgement, although in the interest of forum continuation the rules have been pretty lax over the years such the pretty much Uncle Tom Cobbly and all can have a word in here
You can read the forum entrance criteria for yourself and make your own judgement, although in the interest of forum continuation the rules have been pretty lax over the years such the pretty much Uncle Tom Cobbly and all can have a word in here
Join Date: May 2005
Location: 50'11N 004' 16W
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think there's an old axiom thats applicable her:
You join as a civvy then you become an "ex". You do not return to civvy.
There are plenty of "ex" who are throbbers though. I should know...
You join as a civvy then you become an "ex". You do not return to civvy.
There are plenty of "ex" who are throbbers though. I should know...
Join Date: May 2005
Location: 50'11N 004' 16W
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think I made that clear, but yes.
Im a throbber due to the fact that I base my opinions and judgments on the RN as I knew it. Not as it is now. Im only 6 years out though and I'm not emplyed in a civvy role telling current matelots how to "be a matelot".
I merely offer a free forum-based consultancy on the matter should my opinion be required, or not.
Im a throbber due to the fact that I base my opinions and judgments on the RN as I knew it. Not as it is now. Im only 6 years out though and I'm not emplyed in a civvy role telling current matelots how to "be a matelot".
I merely offer a free forum-based consultancy on the matter should my opinion be required, or not.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Before I joined in 74 I was a Mr and as such was a civilian. When I leave next year I will return to being a Mr and will once again be a civilian, this is not a difficult concept
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After 38 years of military indoctrination, it will not be too long after standing at the main gate wondering whether to turn right or left that you realise you are 'ex-military' and will be for the rest of your life.
You can choose to continue your military involvement with Honoury Mess Membership, or ATC Instructor or you can never, ever look over your shoulder. It matters not, your mindset and attitude to life will always give away your background and you may as well have BritMil tattooed on your forehead.
To think any different is naive.
You can choose to continue your military involvement with Honoury Mess Membership, or ATC Instructor or you can never, ever look over your shoulder. It matters not, your mindset and attitude to life will always give away your background and you may as well have BritMil tattooed on your forehead.
To think any different is naive.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Philippines
Age: 81
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remain very pro MOD and in particular pro RAF as my father and uncle both served in the mob. I wouldn't be surprised if you were in nappies when the old man was a Boy Entrant at Locking in 1949.