Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Best years are gone

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Best years are gone

Old 20th Jun 2013, 16:00
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,895
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Well, that's true Siseman, but I've little doubt that catering would have been civilianised and contracted out anyway. If they're even flogging off SAR....
Fox3WheresMyBanana is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2013, 16:29
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Baston
Posts: 3,196
Received 415 Likes on 191 Posts
The fine detail eludes me but a similar piece of stupidity occurred c. 1995 with respect to Metpersons living in Officers' Messes.

Being MoD and thoroughly good people, we were permitted [if accepted!] to live in Mess on attachment, and for a very modest sum. Our subsistence rate was correspondingly small.

There was clear advantage to the RAF and the metperson ........... liaison was virtually continuous and good feedback was had by all.

Despite valiant efforts in high places, it was ruled that the metpersons would henceforth pay full whack, and receive full subsistence.

Now Messes can be great, but there are downsides [no, really!] so metpersons living-in ceased almost overnight, as they voted for a nice hotel with ensuite facilities and towels.

I don't think MoD made a net saving, and there was a tangible loss to the service.
langleybaston is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2013, 17:10
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Anglia
Posts: 2,076
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
It's all very well discussing who was right so many years ago (and nobody can be right in this debate) but the fact remains that catering is now privatised and that there seems to be a "move" being made toward compulsary use of a facility that not many people are fond of (and perhaps were never fond of). And the poor news that scotland craves for Macdonalds only goes to reinforce the Battle of the Table Plate in MOD.

In the middle of all this is also a barely noticed fact that none of those poor souls who aren't using the messes seems to have starved yet.

It seems to me then that the caterer is at fault. They are not doing anything to entice their "captive customers" into their web of profit milking. So, on their current performance, they will no doubt go bust.

And then what?
Rigga is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2013, 17:14
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,895
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
If there is any common sense left, no private contractor will take the next contract, so the Government will have to provide the service. At which point it may realise (but certainly won't admit) that Siseman et al were right all along.

...and in about 20 years, some incredibly bright politician/VSO will (re)invent the wheel!

Last edited by Fox3WheresMyBanana; 20th Jun 2013 at 17:14.
Fox3WheresMyBanana is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2013, 17:17
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,349
Received 2,546 Likes on 1,075 Posts
Well no matter how bad I cannot see it going back, could you imagine the uproar if they suddenly said we are going to deduct a couple of hundred plus back off your wages, one would imagine a lot have that already spent elsewhere.
NutLoose is online now  
Old 20th Jun 2013, 17:32
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,349
Received 2,546 Likes on 1,075 Posts
Here is a thought...

Run a thread similar to these and review your lunches, perhaps then those stations getting poor reviews may improve..

This one covers crew meals

The unofficial box nasty hall of shame

And the one that impressed the heck out of me, that reviews school meals

http://neverseconds.********.co.uk/

Missing word is blog spot

Last edited by NutLoose; 20th Jun 2013 at 17:35.
NutLoose is online now  
Old 20th Jun 2013, 17:46
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by NutLoose
Here is a thought...

Run a thread similar to these and review your lunches, perhaps then those stations getting poor reviews may improve..

This one covers crew meals

The unofficial box nasty hall of shame

And the one that impressed the heck out of me, that reviews school meals

http://neverseconds.********.co.uk/

Missing word is blog spot

Top advice Nutloose. The school meals review was done by a primary school kid who photographed her school meal every day then uploaded the picture to the net with a short critique. From what I remember the council banned her from taking the photographs but following public interest they changed their mind and agreed to review the quality of the meals. Now if a primary school kid can do it the what's keeping you
TomJoad is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2013, 20:08
  #68 (permalink)  

Avoid imitations
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,550
Received 388 Likes on 201 Posts
These days it would probably be deemed to come under the Official Secrets Act, or the Anti-Terrorist laws!
ShyTorque is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2013, 23:48
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: ACT, Australia
Age: 62
Posts: 500
Received 11 Likes on 4 Posts
Just read the AMPLT reports around about 1985 onwards. Every station that they went to had the same cry - "we only want to pay for the food that we eat". Well, you got it. The VSOs listened to you.
Well said that man. I clearly remember standing and voicing my opinion against PAYD during a AMP visit to Cottesmore. I thought I was about to be lynched by the majority in that briefing room for doing so, talk about unpopular.

We were also clearly briefed on the implications of a PAYD scheme, lack of choice etc, and that once implemented there would be little to no chance of a return to old style messing.

Sadly the majority didn't listen and got exactly what they asked for.
Skeleton is offline  
Old 21st Jun 2013, 01:14
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: in the mess
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I remember at Odiham When AM (at the time) Loader came down. A few of us tried to ask him to reconsider before it was too late. His reply was that his hands were tied, as the Navy and the Army wanted it!

Always someone else's fault isn't it?

I am so sad what I had predicted has transpired, to a tee. I hate being right about this.
nice castle is offline  
Old 21st Jun 2013, 09:20
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 256
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I see the standard of reporting is up with the best of the Daily Snail:

Microwaves, toasters and kettles have been banned from airmen and women’s rooms at RAF Leuchars after being deemed a fire risk.
Airmen are now aircrew.
Not quite, PN.
baffman is offline  
Old 21st Jun 2013, 10:59
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Somewhere Sunny
Posts: 1,600
Received 14 Likes on 8 Posts
SLAM Blocks were specified to have 'snack preparation areas' and were provided with Microwaves, fridges, dischwashers, kettles and toasters. Yes, oven and hobs woud be good but, to be honest, who would clean them?

As Customer 1 for SLAM for a brief few months, I had some rather stiff words with several Garrison and Stn cdrs, who removed all these facilites the moment the blcoks were accepted from the Contractors. Firstly, they had been provided as part of the deal, secondly they remained the property of the contractors for a period of 5 years (and therefore had to maintain and PAT them etc) and thirdly, it meant that guys and girls would replicate the equipment in the bedrooms which are not suitable locations for cooking.

Part of the SLAM design (and I mean SLAM, not some of the PFI 'SLAM-like' blocks that have been put up) was to have the snack preparation area opposite the communual area (provided with sofas, chairs, tv etc) and with large windows facing the wing corridors to encourage social interaction. On one Army site, within a couple of days of accepting the Blocks, the Garrison Commander had boarded up these (expensive) windows and removed the SALM provided furniture from the communual room and turned them into a 'Duty room' for the block Cpl.

The next addition was unauthorised coat-hooks in the suites. Now, in case you think I am being rather analy-retentive, SLAM accn had to meet various Government standards, inter alia, had to be 'ligature-proof' ie, design optimised to reduce suicide attempts by hanging. Accordingly, upper doors for the wardrobes had frangible hinges, hooks in bathrooms were adhesive and therefore would pull away from the walls at certain loads.

The final one was at a Joint site, where the 3/4 sized Double Beds that came as standard were removed by Barrack Stores and replaced with nasty, narrow steel-framed beds, which didn't comply with the anti-ligature design requirements (ie they could be stood on their ends and a noose attached to the top frame). When quizzed why the beds had been removed, the Stn Cdr indicated that 'they were too good for the troops and anyway, we don't have linen and duvets for them'.

Sometimes we are our own worst enemy and we simply don't embue our people with the modicum of common sense.
Whenurhappy is offline  
Old 21st Jun 2013, 16:24
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Whenurhappy
SLAM Blocks were specified to have 'snack preparation areas' and were provided with Microwaves, fridges, dischwashers, kettles and toasters. Yes, oven and hobs woud be good but, to be honest, who would clean them?

As Customer 1 for SLAM for a brief few months, I had some rather stiff words with several Garrison and Stn cdrs, who removed all these facilites the moment the blcoks were accepted from the Contractors. Firstly, they had been provided as part of the deal, secondly they remained the property of the contractors for a period of 5 years (and therefore had to maintain and PAT them etc) and thirdly, it meant that guys and girls would replicate the equipment in the bedrooms which are not suitable locations for cooking.

Part of the SLAM design (and I mean SLAM, not some of the PFI 'SLAM-like' blocks that have been put up) was to have the snack preparation area opposite the communual area (provided with sofas, chairs, tv etc) and with large windows facing the wing corridors to encourage social interaction. On one Army site, within a couple of days of accepting the Blocks, the Garrison Commander had boarded up these (expensive) windows and removed the SALM provided furniture from the communual room and turned them into a 'Duty room' for the block Cpl.

The next addition was unauthorised coat-hooks in the suites. Now, in case you think I am being rather analy-retentive, SLAM accn had to meet various Government standards, inter alia, had to be 'ligature-proof' ie, design optimised to reduce suicide attempts by hanging. Accordingly, upper doors for the wardrobes had frangible hinges, hooks in bathrooms were adhesive and therefore would pull away from the walls at certain loads.

The final one was at a Joint site, where the 3/4 sized Double Beds that came as standard were removed by Barrack Stores and replaced with nasty, narrow steel-framed beds, which didn't comply with the anti-ligature design requirements (ie they could be stood on their ends and a noose attached to the top frame). When quizzed why the beds had been removed, the Stn Cdr indicated that 'they were too good for the troops and anyway, we don't have linen and duvets for them'.

Sometimes we are our own worst enemy and we simply don't embue our people with the modicum of common sense.

You have hit the nail firmly on the head Whenurhappy. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with SLAM in fact had it been executed properly it would have brought single accom arrangements into the 20 century never mind the 21 century. Always thought we had a patronising attitude towards singlies. We seamed to conveniently forget that students from age 17 onwards the length and breadth of the country all manage to look after themselves. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that varied and nutritious meals cannot be provided by private contract at reasonable cost - we have simply frigged the contracts as per usual.

Last edited by TomJoad; 21st Jun 2013 at 16:27.
TomJoad is offline  
Old 21st Jun 2013, 16:45
  #74 (permalink)  
SVK
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Somewhere......
Posts: 135
Received 8 Likes on 3 Posts
Although some here seem to hold the opinion of 'we told you this would happen', the fact is it needn't have been so.

All I wanted as a liver in was to pay for the meals that I actually ate and not be charged for services that I did not receive. Simple as that.

I did NOT say that I wanted Mess catering to be contractorised, put open to tender or tied in with the leisure aspects of the Stn. I didn't even say that I wanted the meals that I did take to remain at the same prices.

I certainly didn't want batting to be reduced to once a week and every meal time to be an admin nightmare of form-filling, protein versus carbohydrate and Servers ticking of the number of portions remaining.

Oh - and I DEFINITELY didn't want them to simply keep putting out the same cold desserts on the trolley until some poor bugger finally gives in and bends their spoon digging into 10 day old Angel Delight!
SVK is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.