recruiting freeze
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
M2, been there, done that, got the book.
I remember when aircrew 'retired' at 38, took the money, swanned around until the kids got to secondary school age, rejoined, got BSA and paid back their gratutity on the never never.
Then FTRS as a means of robbing Paul to pay Peter.
I remember when aircrew 'retired' at 38, took the money, swanned around until the kids got to secondary school age, rejoined, got BSA and paid back their gratutity on the never never.
Then FTRS as a means of robbing Paul to pay Peter.
PN,
I have to say I did notice that myself the other week. And frankly, if people are voting with their feet, so to speak, the powers that be only have themselves to blame. For far too long, the mantra of people are our best asset has proven to be total pigswill, and that perception is now feeding into the public eye.
Afterall, who on earth could blame an individual for not wanting to join an organisation that in career and life terms holds all the cards - long holds coupled with the uncertainty that there will be a slot at the end of the hold, followed by the uncertainty of which fleets will be axed and rapidly deteriorating Ts&Cs and pay cuts year after year (don't forget when times were good and the economy booming, Brown - as PM and Chancellor - capped our payrises to avoid inflationary pressure) and that's before you add on ever increasing lengths of time away from home.
Furthermore, the recent articles in the press only serve to highlight all these issues, uncertainty and generally rock bottom morale. Hardly conducive to a professionally fulfiling career is it?! It is rapidly getting to the stage that the only people who will be interested are those that do it for 'Queen & Country' or because it feels right to do it, rather than for the benefits. Unfortunately, if that's your demographic in this day and age, you are fishing from an ever shrinking pond. Maybe we are going to get to the stage sooner rather than later that the powers that be realise they have made a complete horlicks of things and will either grow a set of balls and say no - across all 3 Services - it's time for a bit of jointery against the politicians! Then again, probably not, too many vested interests.
As was suggested by a VSO a few months back, the RAF will be an exciting place to be in 2020 ... if we don't muck it up totally before then. Even when we do recruit, we will need to up our game; I have seen at first hand a very able individual apply to the RAF, only to be mucked about so much by the recruiters that said individual went to the RN who took her with open arms. The VSO's plans for 2020 are looking like a very big if at the moment.
I have to say I did notice that myself the other week. And frankly, if people are voting with their feet, so to speak, the powers that be only have themselves to blame. For far too long, the mantra of people are our best asset has proven to be total pigswill, and that perception is now feeding into the public eye.
Afterall, who on earth could blame an individual for not wanting to join an organisation that in career and life terms holds all the cards - long holds coupled with the uncertainty that there will be a slot at the end of the hold, followed by the uncertainty of which fleets will be axed and rapidly deteriorating Ts&Cs and pay cuts year after year (don't forget when times were good and the economy booming, Brown - as PM and Chancellor - capped our payrises to avoid inflationary pressure) and that's before you add on ever increasing lengths of time away from home.
Furthermore, the recent articles in the press only serve to highlight all these issues, uncertainty and generally rock bottom morale. Hardly conducive to a professionally fulfiling career is it?! It is rapidly getting to the stage that the only people who will be interested are those that do it for 'Queen & Country' or because it feels right to do it, rather than for the benefits. Unfortunately, if that's your demographic in this day and age, you are fishing from an ever shrinking pond. Maybe we are going to get to the stage sooner rather than later that the powers that be realise they have made a complete horlicks of things and will either grow a set of balls and say no - across all 3 Services - it's time for a bit of jointery against the politicians! Then again, probably not, too many vested interests.
As was suggested by a VSO a few months back, the RAF will be an exciting place to be in 2020 ... if we don't muck it up totally before then. Even when we do recruit, we will need to up our game; I have seen at first hand a very able individual apply to the RAF, only to be mucked about so much by the recruiters that said individual went to the RN who took her with open arms. The VSO's plans for 2020 are looking like a very big if at the moment.
Quite right, Melchett. We were already seeing that happen before I left a couple of years ago. I know every generation has said this, but we really weren't attracting the quantity or quality as much as we used to. I'm not saying we weren't getting good recruits, just not as many good recruits. And the trend was still downward even then when things were relatively good. I hate think what it's like now.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
So, given that the real solution as propounded by CM (SDSR) is outwith the RAF what can the RAF do within its constraints?
I guess what we always used to do. Keep using the planning assumptions we have and hope that the crystal ball doesn't pack in. But the only real answer lies with the Government. They need to take a really long, hard look into the future - not a rushed, cursory SDSR. Then issue a statement to say what size and shape they want in 5 and 10 years and let the planners go to work. It won't happen, will it?
Regarding the lack of wannabees on this forum recently, it's been largely the same story over at TheStudentRoom, there the message has been put across in no uncertain terms that every branch is shut and then only opened for 1-3 weeks at a time.
There is still an active interest in the Trades, but those looking for a commission are finding other jobs [nb, nobody is referring to the Armed Forces as a career anymore, either].
There is still an active interest in the Trades, but those looking for a commission are finding other jobs [nb, nobody is referring to the Armed Forces as a career anymore, either].
PN, there are still some military sim jobs out there; I've seen a handful of ex-GR4 and GR9 guys arriving at Coningsby to do some time in the Typhoon sim, admittedly with the carrot of a tour in the jet afterwards.
There are a lot of us who would have enjoyed a broadening ground tour over the next few years while manning balance is achieved. Trouble is, as soon as you ask for something esoteric like a Flt Cdr job at recruit training, or a couple of years in an AFCO, they start the clock ticking to take your flying pay away.
For a relatively senior Flt Lt aircrew mate, the thought of losing flying pay is quite grim. I can accept the concept that if I volunteer to move aside from flying-related jobs, I should lose it after a while, but if I'm forced into a non-flying-related job because the service don't have one for me, it seems a bit of a kick in the teeth.
Your aircrew take a long time to train and therefore a long time to replace. A way to "hold" them aside for a tour, even in an out-of-branch position would be extremely popular if it didn't come with punitive measures.
What surprises me is while we're struggling to find places to put half our pilots, why do we still have 75% of our UAS posts filled by reservists?
There are a lot of us who would have enjoyed a broadening ground tour over the next few years while manning balance is achieved. Trouble is, as soon as you ask for something esoteric like a Flt Cdr job at recruit training, or a couple of years in an AFCO, they start the clock ticking to take your flying pay away.
For a relatively senior Flt Lt aircrew mate, the thought of losing flying pay is quite grim. I can accept the concept that if I volunteer to move aside from flying-related jobs, I should lose it after a while, but if I'm forced into a non-flying-related job because the service don't have one for me, it seems a bit of a kick in the teeth.
Your aircrew take a long time to train and therefore a long time to replace. A way to "hold" them aside for a tour, even in an out-of-branch position would be extremely popular if it didn't come with punitive measures.
What surprises me is while we're struggling to find places to put half our pilots, why do we still have 75% of our UAS posts filled by reservists?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 1,873
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Further to 5F6B, why have any FTRS across all branches and trades at all? These posts could/should be used as respite tours for those who need a break, bringing front line attitudes and thinking into some pretty quiet backwaters.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK - sometimes
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Further to 5F6B, why have any FTRS across all branches and trades at all? These posts could/should be used as respite tours for those who need a break, bringing front line attitudes and thinking into some pretty quiet backwaters.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interestingly enough a bunch called the USN (who one could argue have a relatively strong motivation for turning out a high standard product) take entrants onto the T-45 Goshawk from either T-6, T-34 or (from France) the Epsilon. Perhaps there is an argument that the 'elementary-basic-advanced-weapons' pipeline is a stage too long.
On a different subject altogether. If you stay past 38 now there is an increased chance of you filling a non-flying related job (what are we at 40 FE@R or so across the FW board) and therefore risking/ losing your flying pay. If you are aged 45 or below you might want to be considering how to augment a pension that is about to take a hit (clue - can't do it whilst still inside). If you stay the chances of commanding anything in the reduced construct is limited. If you stay but don't want to command the opportunity for the system to provide ejection seats for 'grey beards' is reduced. (See point 1, above). In all seriousness the cumulative effect of all we have seen in the recent past is incredibly retention negative.
In fact, through incredibly irony, the only thing retention positive at the moment is the redundancy programme (albeit for a fortnight or so). Far better to wait and get redundancy than leave on a PVR!
Happy New Year and for those lucky enough to still be aviating in the military - keep your eyes out!
On a different subject altogether. If you stay past 38 now there is an increased chance of you filling a non-flying related job (what are we at 40 FE@R or so across the FW board) and therefore risking/ losing your flying pay. If you are aged 45 or below you might want to be considering how to augment a pension that is about to take a hit (clue - can't do it whilst still inside). If you stay the chances of commanding anything in the reduced construct is limited. If you stay but don't want to command the opportunity for the system to provide ejection seats for 'grey beards' is reduced. (See point 1, above). In all seriousness the cumulative effect of all we have seen in the recent past is incredibly retention negative.
In fact, through incredibly irony, the only thing retention positive at the moment is the redundancy programme (albeit for a fortnight or so). Far better to wait and get redundancy than leave on a PVR!
Happy New Year and for those lucky enough to still be aviating in the military - keep your eyes out!
If you stay past 38 now there is an increased chance of you filling a non-flying related job (what are we at 40 FE@R or so across the FW board) and therefore risking/ losing your flying pay.
I'm probably just being thick (it's just the festive wine, honest!), but surely most people who stay past 38 will be PA and therefore won't be getting flying pay anyway?
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't have the stats to be honest, but if what you say is true then a 'career' past 38 is for only a few. (PA being a past time!)
However. If you want to keep a through put of young blood going, to keep skill sets at all points of the age profile, then PA requirement goes down.
And why would you opt for PA if it meant not flying..I wouldn't personally.
However. If you want to keep a through put of young blood going, to keep skill sets at all points of the age profile, then PA requirement goes down.
And why would you opt for PA if it meant not flying..I wouldn't personally.
Try Life after the Armed Forces! .. .. .. .. PA Pension 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the pension changes coming in, that is going to be far less attractive.
PA 5 years, PVR, no loss FP, pensionable FP. Those signing on to PA in 2016 face a much worse off deal.
All the calculations I have done, purely in financial terms, show leaving at your 16 point and paying down the mortgage with the gratutity is the most efficient, and, post pension changes, leaving at option is the most financially viable IF you can get a decent airline job upon leaving.
PA 5 years, PVR, no loss FP, pensionable FP. Those signing on to PA in 2016 face a much worse off deal.
All the calculations I have done, purely in financial terms, show leaving at your 16 point and paying down the mortgage with the gratutity is the most efficient, and, post pension changes, leaving at option is the most financially viable IF you can get a decent airline job upon leaving.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Harrier Force was (about 6 years ago) heading into meltdown and it wasn't helped by their insistance that only Harrier pilots could be Reds, "or we'll see a massive increase in accidents".
I personally know at least 10 former Jaguar pilots who flew with the reds in the last decade or so - none of whom had an accident.
It was the Harrier guys telling me that. Mind you, that was a fair proportion of the Reds at that time IIRC. I suspect they were more concerned about getting two-seat pilots than Jag mates. But the Tornado guys seem to have done OK too.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK and where I'm sent!
Posts: 519
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by CM
I suspect they were more concerned about getting two-seat pilots than Jag mates.
