Morale in the Armed Forces
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Morale in the Armed Forces
Morale in armed forces plunges to new low - The Telegraph 10 Sep 11
How very sad!
More than half of all officers and 43 per cent of other ranks, believe the armed forces is suffering from low morale following a year of pay freezes, cuts and redundancies. Satisfaction with life in the services has fallen, along with levels of pride and feelings of being valued.
In the RAF, only two per cent of officers – many of whom are taking part in operations in Afghanistan and over Libya – believe morale is high and 70 per cent state it is low.
The figures are the worst since the Armed Forces Continuous Attitudes Survey began four years ago. Satisfaction with basic pay, pension and allowances has fallen and many feel it is not safe to challenge the way things are done in their service or within the MoD.
In the RAF, only two per cent of officers – many of whom are taking part in operations in Afghanistan and over Libya – believe morale is high and 70 per cent state it is low.
The figures are the worst since the Armed Forces Continuous Attitudes Survey began four years ago. Satisfaction with basic pay, pension and allowances has fallen and many feel it is not safe to challenge the way things are done in their service or within the MoD.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: England formerly Great Britain
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'LOW' is not strong enough a word.
*Those made redundant have a year to spread their discontent.
*Those who volunteered for redundancy and did not get it have years to spread their discontent.
*There will be a PVR spike now that Manning will; in the main, welcome.
*The delay to the announcement of the next redundancy catchment criteria will cause uncertainty and associated discontent.
*Understaffing caused by soon to be ex-employees still on the books but (rightfully) engaged in resettlement is already causing discontent.
*Pulling out of Afghan in the belief that soon afterwards nothing will have changed will cause anger and bitterness.
*The lack of trust already present in towards CoC is bound to intensify.
*As I said, replace 'Low' with subsurface and you are getting near to the truth.
"Living the dream" has most certainly been replaced with "Same sh17 different day" .....and I know of at least one choreographed det to Afghan to survive tranche one; sanctioned by the CoC.
It probably would have been better for all concerned to have massacred the military in a oner in order that we all get on with our lives dealing with whatever cards have been dealt. The uncertainty is creating a dreadfull 3 years for all and the lack of management and interpersonal skills of some is not good to see.
On a positive note...... mmmm.... struggling with that one.
*Those made redundant have a year to spread their discontent.
*Those who volunteered for redundancy and did not get it have years to spread their discontent.
*There will be a PVR spike now that Manning will; in the main, welcome.
*The delay to the announcement of the next redundancy catchment criteria will cause uncertainty and associated discontent.
*Understaffing caused by soon to be ex-employees still on the books but (rightfully) engaged in resettlement is already causing discontent.
*Pulling out of Afghan in the belief that soon afterwards nothing will have changed will cause anger and bitterness.
*The lack of trust already present in towards CoC is bound to intensify.
*As I said, replace 'Low' with subsurface and you are getting near to the truth.
"Living the dream" has most certainly been replaced with "Same sh17 different day" .....and I know of at least one choreographed det to Afghan to survive tranche one; sanctioned by the CoC.
It probably would have been better for all concerned to have massacred the military in a oner in order that we all get on with our lives dealing with whatever cards have been dealt. The uncertainty is creating a dreadfull 3 years for all and the lack of management and interpersonal skills of some is not good to see.
On a positive note...... mmmm.... struggling with that one.
Admin Guru,
It comes as no surprise that a PVR spike is expected to occur, after all, that is why only 80% of the required redundancies (aircrew) were attempted in the first tranche.
It is hoped that people will fall for the ploy and PVR, thus achieving the required manpower reductions in a much cheaper way.
Morale was badly affected by refusing to accept volunteers for redundancy and selecting really good people for compulsory redundancy, all of the people involved satisfied the criteria for redundancy.
The only reason I can see for not accepting some of the volunteers is that they were assessed as likely to PVR if they didn't get selected.
The selection of the compulsory candidates was to get rid of people who would stay in and not PVR and they therefore had to be given the boot.
It also seemed that it very much depended on how easy it would be to replace certain people in selected posts and in many instances, it didn't matter how you had been reported over your 'career', but what post you were in or about to occupy during the selection and implementation phase.
On The Top Bunk,
either that was so tongue in cheek that I missed it or,
you haven't taken your medication today.
It comes as no surprise that a PVR spike is expected to occur, after all, that is why only 80% of the required redundancies (aircrew) were attempted in the first tranche.
It is hoped that people will fall for the ploy and PVR, thus achieving the required manpower reductions in a much cheaper way.
Morale was badly affected by refusing to accept volunteers for redundancy and selecting really good people for compulsory redundancy, all of the people involved satisfied the criteria for redundancy.
The only reason I can see for not accepting some of the volunteers is that they were assessed as likely to PVR if they didn't get selected.
The selection of the compulsory candidates was to get rid of people who would stay in and not PVR and they therefore had to be given the boot.
It also seemed that it very much depended on how easy it would be to replace certain people in selected posts and in many instances, it didn't matter how you had been reported over your 'career', but what post you were in or about to occupy during the selection and implementation phase.
On The Top Bunk,
either that was so tongue in cheek that I missed it or,
you haven't taken your medication today.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Somewhere nice overseas.
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Siggie,
Where does the figure of 80% of required aircrew redundancies originate? Is that a correct number, with evidence to support, or just a ballpark guess?
Thanks.
Where does the figure of 80% of required aircrew redundancies originate? Is that a correct number, with evidence to support, or just a ballpark guess?
Thanks.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Somewhere nice overseas.
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Siggie - my apologies, I should have seen your location and realised you were also away from the hub of things.
Any information, or even rumours backed up by extremely tenuous facts, always appreciated.
Any information, or even rumours backed up by extremely tenuous facts, always appreciated.
I have given 30 years of my life to the RAF in one form or another and I cannot remember a single year where there was not talk of low morale, poor leadership and threats of PVR. So it will be very interesting to see what the actual figures for PVR turn out to be.
The UK economy is stuffed and is going to get a whole lot worse over the next few years so walking away from a job that still brings with it many perks, medical, dental etc etc is going to have to be thought through very carefully. I can't help but think that some people are incredibly naive if they think they are going to stroll into a better deal. Some will of course but most will not.
I do agree the RAF is sliding downhill at the moment and I also agree it is a lack of leadership. Too many MBAs, pamphlets and management speak for my liking, usually practised by those who cannot communicate in any other way. nevertheless, do not underestimate the good deal that you have in todays climate. Throw it away at your peril.
As for morale, pretty good amongst the youngsters because they know no different. It will take them at least another 5 or so years before they register for PPRUNE
The UK economy is stuffed and is going to get a whole lot worse over the next few years so walking away from a job that still brings with it many perks, medical, dental etc etc is going to have to be thought through very carefully. I can't help but think that some people are incredibly naive if they think they are going to stroll into a better deal. Some will of course but most will not.
I do agree the RAF is sliding downhill at the moment and I also agree it is a lack of leadership. Too many MBAs, pamphlets and management speak for my liking, usually practised by those who cannot communicate in any other way. nevertheless, do not underestimate the good deal that you have in todays climate. Throw it away at your peril.
As for morale, pretty good amongst the youngsters because they know no different. It will take them at least another 5 or so years before they register for PPRUNE
A few months ago, When I PVR'd (applied for Early Termination - sounds like Dignitas!), you can put down the reasons that made you want to leave. Low and behold, 1 month later, when the PVR was finally accepted there was a JPA workflow saying that they had been changed for me!! No wonder the attitude survey is always better than the real situation...
LJ
LJ
Last edited by Lima Juliet; 11th Sep 2011 at 07:42.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The threats of PVR are very branch and trade specific. No worries if you cost 99p to train and work in PSF, bit more of a problem for the RAF when it comes to the individuals who operate at the sharp end (ATC, Engineering and some aircrew!) and cost a significant amount to train.
The number of PVRs is fairly significant, but nowhere near as significant as the number that seem to be taking an option and/or leaving at the 38 point. With corporate experience outside of the desert environment and low tech threat area being at a premium, we are going to do serious damage if we cant retain at least some of our old and bolds.
Having spoke to a few techies, mannings policy of scaling back some ranks by 25% is frankly barking. Many the engineering world are going to lose have experience of their type that cant be replaced by a quick course at cosford. The civvie world would be aghast at the thought of binning individuals as they are reaching their prime, on the basis that they are not progressing up the management ladder and instead are more than happy with their lot in their current rank. Is there an arguement for retention incentives or at least 5-6 year postings for a few star individuals who are happy in current rank and in their current role? Here is a tip, why not retain the guy who can clear the AV snag in 5 minutes whilst we wait to launch on tight crew duty, rather than the guy that runs the tea bar and gets written up well for it? Most of those engineers recently leaving for sunnier climes didnt only do it for the cash, job security probably also played a part. They were some of our best people. I also think the devisiveness of pay 2000 that sees a psf blondie payed the same or more as someone completeing aircraft engineering trade training at Cosford is something that needs sorting pronto. Chances with the blunties controlling the purse strings? Not a chance.
The number of PVRs is fairly significant, but nowhere near as significant as the number that seem to be taking an option and/or leaving at the 38 point. With corporate experience outside of the desert environment and low tech threat area being at a premium, we are going to do serious damage if we cant retain at least some of our old and bolds.
Having spoke to a few techies, mannings policy of scaling back some ranks by 25% is frankly barking. Many the engineering world are going to lose have experience of their type that cant be replaced by a quick course at cosford. The civvie world would be aghast at the thought of binning individuals as they are reaching their prime, on the basis that they are not progressing up the management ladder and instead are more than happy with their lot in their current rank. Is there an arguement for retention incentives or at least 5-6 year postings for a few star individuals who are happy in current rank and in their current role? Here is a tip, why not retain the guy who can clear the AV snag in 5 minutes whilst we wait to launch on tight crew duty, rather than the guy that runs the tea bar and gets written up well for it? Most of those engineers recently leaving for sunnier climes didnt only do it for the cash, job security probably also played a part. They were some of our best people. I also think the devisiveness of pay 2000 that sees a psf blondie payed the same or more as someone completeing aircraft engineering trade training at Cosford is something that needs sorting pronto. Chances with the blunties controlling the purse strings? Not a chance.
Last edited by VinRouge; 11th Sep 2011 at 09:28.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 146 Likes
on
28 Posts
I was intrigued by the 2% of RAF Officers who believe that morale is actually high (source: Sunday Telegraph). Who are these people, and how soon can they be promoted into the highest ranks? On second thoughts they may be all the Air Ranks (they must make up about 2% of the Officer Corps).
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: exiled
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VinRouge
"The threats of PVR are very branch and trade specific. No worries if you cost 99p to train and work in PSF, bit more of a problem for the RAF when it comes to the individuals who operate at the sharp end (ATC, Engineering and some aircrew!) and cost a significant amount to train. "
And what Air Force might you be in team player? 
"The threats of PVR are very branch and trade specific. No worries if you cost 99p to train and work in PSF, bit more of a problem for the RAF when it comes to the individuals who operate at the sharp end (ATC, Engineering and some aircrew!) and cost a significant amount to train. "
And what Air Force might you be in team player?
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@VinRouge
Well said re-pay2000.
One of the [more minor] items to disenfranchise me was the loss of the extra few days leave I was due having eventually survived options for change, front line first etc,etc and be promoted to "the mans mess".
Another kicker was going back to doing the same duties as Ord Sgt that I carried out as Ord Cpl **years previously, namely signing out keys whilst on duty in the guardroom, hard earned senority/RHIP?
Yep, take this job and shove it sprang to mind.
** No hot pursuits through the domestic sites anymore though, boring huh.
One of the [more minor] items to disenfranchise me was the loss of the extra few days leave I was due having eventually survived options for change, front line first etc,etc and be promoted to "the mans mess".
Another kicker was going back to doing the same duties as Ord Sgt that I carried out as Ord Cpl **years previously, namely signing out keys whilst on duty in the guardroom, hard earned senority/RHIP?
Yep, take this job and shove it sprang to mind.
** No hot pursuits through the domestic sites anymore though, boring huh.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: exiled
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually SFFP you have a point. Why not get rid of the engineers and let contractors do the work? You could keep a small pool of deployable engineers and let contractors do the work, i mean after all costs would be cheaper? We do seem to always have a lot of them sitting around in T bars not doing a great deal, be much easier to save money on them ! You could save on training costs too, I mean VinRouge obviously judges value added to the RAF on the length of how long techie training is at Cosford
You could easily stick the ATC in with this as well and of course the 99p Administrators. None of us who do not sit in cockpits are infallible!
I am only joking of course, there are all sorts that make up the team, but and i say this from a very learned view point, all of us are here to put planes in the Air and all are as important as each other.
! You could save on training costs too, I mean VinRouge obviously judges value added to the RAF on the length of how long techie training is at CosfordYou could easily stick the ATC in with this as well and of course the 99p Administrators. None of us who do not sit in cockpits are infallible!
I am only joking of course, there are all sorts that make up the team, but and i say this from a very learned view point, all of us are here to put planes in the Air and all are as important as each other.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry chips, might have come across as rude and not tongue in cheek as it was meant. There are those in all trades/branches that seem to thrive off making others lives either abject misery or bend over backwards to help. I have encountered both in admin (fortunately most have been fantastic help), undoubtedly as money is involved when it comes to admin, their faux pas and sticking to the rules despite the operational imperative means these examples are the ones that spring to mind first. The very few individuals in the admin trade (CS included) that love to hate anyone outside of that world and lack understanding from others point of view who are trying their best in difficult circumstances doesnt help
. But then again, my tongue in cheek comment above probably reinforces their point of view doesnt it! I have to disagree about the gingers though, I think it fundamentally wrong that someone with expensive transferrable skills who spends longer in training is lower down the payscale as a result of that training. It also seems that the admin community peeps get promoted quicker too.
. But then again, my tongue in cheek comment above probably reinforces their point of view doesnt it!
I have to disagree about the gingers though, I think it fundamentally wrong that someone with expensive transferrable skills who spends longer in training is lower down the payscale as a result of that training. It also seems that the admin community peeps get promoted quicker too.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: exiled
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
VR, in all honesty, most of the Admin Branch do not understand how tricky life is outside of SHQ sometimes as they do not get exposed to the constant grind of Sqn Detachments and fluidity that makes up the front end of the train. Most want to help and try their best but it is a different culture. Ref your point about pay, different arguments ranging from the engineer fixing a multi million pound engine to a blunty managing a raft of HR issues both with different outputs but with the same end state - getting aircraft up in the sky!
Pay 2000 - one of the worst things to happen to the RAF in years!
Trust me - the bluntys do not hold the purse strings!
Pay 2000 - one of the worst things to happen to the RAF in years!
Trust me - the bluntys do not hold the purse strings!