16 years

[Union Jack]

And double virtual dose of Warfarin to you too, Ratty!

Jack

PS And not the medicinal kind .....

[Riskman]

I'm sat here with a glass of red, quietly celebrating the 13th anniversary of my retirement from the RAF after 26 years service. I can't quite believe how the time has flown, but it always does when you're having a good time.

When one door closes, another one opens.

Good luck Rathebelucky.

R

[Laarbruch72]

Are people really this attached after 16 years? I completed 22 recently and never felt much of a pang, I just saw it as the start of my new civilian career, which I was far more excited about.

[ratty1]

I'm not surprised you were excited. Who would want to be an RAF scuffer by choice. Better off joining the MPGS, at least they are not pretending to be something they're not.

[Laarbruch72]

Ah the forum comedian Ratty with one of his usual sad, pithy little digs. So predictable.

[5aday]

Every website has it's very own turkey. Just ignore them and eventually they get tired out.

[goudie]

Ratty does serve a purpose. He makes one happy to know one doesn't have his jaundiced, anti-social outlook on life!

[Whopity]

16 years may seem like a long time but I just realised you hadn't even started when I left after my 27 years. It wasn't the same place that I had joined, but I remember going to RAF At Home days in the 60s and my father saying things were not like this in his day. He claimed you could eat your dinner off the hangar floor in his time, but maybe they didn't have tables then. In the 70s the old hands were telling us it was not as good as it had been 10 years earlier. The hardest thing to find in civvy street is a competent corporal.

[Lima Juliet]

I left last year on a Friday after 22 years, was a Mr for 2 days, then re-joined on the Monday - I've never signed the official secrets act so many times in just 4 days

Anyway, enjoy your life on the outside and if you want back in sometime in the future then look at vacancies on the Reserves website. If you google "FTRS Vacancies" then you'll soon find them.

All the best me old

LJ

[Shack37]

Laarbruch72

Are people really this attached after 16 years? I completed 22 recently and never felt much of a pang, I just saw it as the start of my new civilian career, which I was far more excited about.

Apart from Ratty's usual sad reply (you have to feel sorry for him sometimes) there is something a little sad about yours too. For me, anyone who can leave behind 22 years of a career "without much of a pang" indicates 22 wasted years from the point of view of friendships made (possibly none in your case) and experiences shared (pleasant or otherwise)

[BEagle]

Anyway, enjoy your life on the outside and if you want back in sometime in the future then look at vacancies on the Reserves website. If you google "FTRS Vacancies" then you'll soon find them.

Isn't it somewhat immoral, when people have been made compulsorily redundant agains their wishes and when large numbers of youngsters have had their career aspriations dashed under Cameron's cuts, that the RAF is still looking for FTRS employees?

I see Brize is even looking for an FTRS Air Trafficker. How can the RAF's largest base expect to run without a full complement of regular ATCOs?

FTRS was originally invented to supplement a shortfall. How can it still be justified? And how can 'Sponsored Reservists' even be considered, after the RAF threw so many talented young aircrew on the scrapheap after Cameron's cuts?

[Basil]

"FTRS Vacancies"

Just looked. It would appear that they may actually wish to deploy one in the field and indeed, to where the bar is a bit further than a minute's walk

One or two interesting jobs but I doubt they'd want a 70yo except as a hostile fire decoy

[Lima Juliet]

BEags

The clues are on the website:

These roles are open, in the main, to ex-Service personnel. The broad principle behind the FTRS is that personnel are recruited to make use of skills and competences they already hold (from regular or other Reserve service). Training requirements, therefore, tend to be nil or limited to simple refresher training.

So they want people with skills that they need, without a trg burden. Furthermore, FTRS are paid little or no X-factor, no entitlement to quarters, HTD and CEA (boarding school allowance in old money) as there is no moving about from post to post (apart from the very rare "Full Commitment", for which you may as well be a Regular). So they normally get cheap, experienced labour compared to a Regular.

FTRS posts also recruit and retain into "continuity" posts that need someone specially selected to stay put for many years - RAF Regional Liaison Officers (RAFRLOs) are a good example. RAFRLOs build up a huge network with the Civil Emergency Services, Local Govt, Charities, Schools, etc... They need to be on standby 24/7 and they cover for each other when one is on leave.

FTRS can also be used to fill posts that may be on "run down" to disestablishment or to fill gaps in personnel that simply do not exist within the main cadre - gliding instructors, engineers, etc...

So, no, I do not believe they are immoral.

LJ

[BEagle]

No, I do not believe that FTRS themselves are 'immoral' - rather that the concept is.

[Biggus]

I could be wrong (it wouldn't be the first time!) but I thought that FTRS didn't count towards the manning strength.

So if we have to get down to an RAF strength of say 33,000 by Apr 15 we can have 33,000 regulars and 5,000 FTRS and still claim to meet the manning target!

[goudie]

In my experience that principle applies in companys too. When ordered to reduce headcount just re-engage those who've been made redundant or retired, as contractors, temps etc. Money for them comes out of a different budget.