Retention
Yes a 5 year training pipeline with a 5 year decision cycle is not going to be easy to manage. Some would say it is madness.
I also meant to add that we have quite a retention issue outside of cockpits/flightdecks. We always had a requirement for aircrew in non-flying roles but the advent of the DH structure increased the requirement just at the point that we hoped that the requirement would reduce. It's quite hard to get multiple ground tours out of aircrew for some unfathomable reason…
I also meant to add that we have quite a retention issue outside of cockpits/flightdecks. We always had a requirement for aircrew in non-flying roles but the advent of the DH structure increased the requirement just at the point that we hoped that the requirement would reduce. It's quite hard to get multiple ground tours out of aircrew for some unfathomable reason…
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: England
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are a number of aircrew (SO2/1s) who previously had a fine pair of hands who would love to get out of the desk-job-merry-go-round and get back to an aircraft. Maybe the situation will become so acute that we may have to consider the US squadron model of having additional OF-3 and 4s on squadron but without portfolio?
I am now trying to find an icon of a pig flying backwards...
I am now trying to find an icon of a pig flying backwards...
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the bigger problem with FRIs now is that it comes out of the money devolved to the Single Service. Previously the sS applied to the Treasury/MoD for extra money, now they have to fund it out of their own pot. So, the question for CAS is, what you are going to sacrifice to afford the FRI? The type of money people have been mooting on here are about equivalent to 2 or 3 Junior Ranks' annual salary (at least). Are you prepared to stand up to The Sun (or Defence Select Committee) and say you're worth that?
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: London
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Biggus
The baby pilots were selected for the axe early 2011. If only they would've been productive by now...they wouldn't. Many have gone on to hold for long periods for a multitude of reasons. Some may spend 10 years in the flying training system before they pop out of an OCU.
after kicking out large numbers of baby pilots still in the training system (who hadn't actually failed anything), who would just have started to become productive
We need to recalibrate our costs a bit anyway. Last piece of staff work I saw that mentioned actual training costs put the price tag of producing an LCR(QRA-only) Typhoon pilot at over £10M, with a training pipeline that's a minimum of 4 years long.
There's your simple economics! A £250k FRI to retain a multi-role CR guy, a QWI, or a Flt Cdr is pennies considering your alternative is to spend 40 times as much, wait 4 years, and get a worse product at the end...!
Numbers may vary, but the same simple economics persist across all fleets, I'd bet. With Virgin recruiting, not only will that drag a lot of people away, but it'll generate holes at lots of other "stepping stone" airlines that people will fill too. Qatar Airways have even just announced a route to Scotland, to give them another foothold in the UK, haven't they?
I just can't really see many ways that manning works over the next 5 years.
There's your simple economics! A £250k FRI to retain a multi-role CR guy, a QWI, or a Flt Cdr is pennies considering your alternative is to spend 40 times as much, wait 4 years, and get a worse product at the end...!
Numbers may vary, but the same simple economics persist across all fleets, I'd bet. With Virgin recruiting, not only will that drag a lot of people away, but it'll generate holes at lots of other "stepping stone" airlines that people will fill too. Qatar Airways have even just announced a route to Scotland, to give them another foothold in the UK, haven't they?
I just can't really see many ways that manning works over the next 5 years.
FFG,
Thanks for responding to my post - even if it was to point out I was wrong!
If it's taking up to 10 years from joining to exiting an OCU then the system is in big trouble - how can such a backed up training system provide sufficient output to replace losses, especially as its ability to respond to any short notice changes in outflow or requirement is non existent.
Thanks for responding to my post - even if it was to point out I was wrong!
If it's taking up to 10 years from joining to exiting an OCU then the system is in big trouble - how can such a backed up training system provide sufficient output to replace losses, especially as its ability to respond to any short notice changes in outflow or requirement is non existent.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Lyneham
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The release of 200 guys was to stop the time to OCU from being 10yrs.
Check this out from the USAF. sorry if it's a repeat
USAF Pilots Pass on $225,000 Bonuses | All Things Aero
Check this out from the USAF. sorry if it's a repeat
USAF Pilots Pass on $225,000 Bonuses | All Things Aero
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 146 Likes
on
28 Posts
Interesting that US article and accords with my personal feeling that the take-up of any FRI could be poor unless it was sufficiently large to offend the Daily Mail & Sun headline writers (''RAF pilots get bribes equal to five times nurses' salaries!'')
An FRI of circa £80k after tax spread over 5 years doesn't really compensate for the loss of seniority in an airline, better to get onto the ladder sooner rather than later.
An FRI of circa £80k after tax spread over 5 years doesn't really compensate for the loss of seniority in an airline, better to get onto the ladder sooner rather than later.
Retention
Ken Scott.
Your final point is the one that everyone always trots out when talk of FRIs comes up. The way I see it though is the jam today or jam tomorrow scenario. When most people leave (at roughly 38) they want to be finding a house if they don't already have one. The lump sum helps with this. The FRI temporarily replaces the lump sum and allows for said house purchase. I am well aware that there are past generations of guys that did very well on the housing market and now have their Goergian country estate with no mortgage before their sixtieth birthday, but there are those of us for whom that has not happened (due to the vagaries of the housing market and postings).
People should not always assume that just because an FRI wouldn't tempt them that it wouldn't tempt anyone. It would suit my circumstances very nicely and I am well aware of the whole airline seniority argument. I should also point out that circumstances change and two months from now I may change my mind and want to leave forthwith but I'm a fickle bugger. It's my prerogative.
BV
Your final point is the one that everyone always trots out when talk of FRIs comes up. The way I see it though is the jam today or jam tomorrow scenario. When most people leave (at roughly 38) they want to be finding a house if they don't already have one. The lump sum helps with this. The FRI temporarily replaces the lump sum and allows for said house purchase. I am well aware that there are past generations of guys that did very well on the housing market and now have their Goergian country estate with no mortgage before their sixtieth birthday, but there are those of us for whom that has not happened (due to the vagaries of the housing market and postings).
People should not always assume that just because an FRI wouldn't tempt them that it wouldn't tempt anyone. It would suit my circumstances very nicely and I am well aware of the whole airline seniority argument. I should also point out that circumstances change and two months from now I may change my mind and want to leave forthwith but I'm a fickle bugger. It's my prerogative.
BV
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 146 Likes
on
28 Posts
BV,
As PAS I'm well past the window for any FRI to retain me so I wasn't speaking from a personal perspective - I had my FRI many years ago which I enjoyed spending but wasn't really a critical part of my decision to stay in, that was more down to my enjoyment of the job. I was seeing things from the perspective of someone much younger, without the prospect of advancing to Level 35 PA pay as a Flt Lt and with the rather questionable benefits of an AFPS 15 pension at whatever age it will be paid out.
If there is little point in serving until age 55 given the pension gap & the intent is only to do 5 more years to amortise the FRI then frankly it makes more sense to jump earlier & take whatever lump sum you're entitled to when you go instead of the FRI with the expectation that your 'lack of loyalty' will be rewarded through additional seniority over the coming years.
As PAS I'm well past the window for any FRI to retain me so I wasn't speaking from a personal perspective - I had my FRI many years ago which I enjoyed spending but wasn't really a critical part of my decision to stay in, that was more down to my enjoyment of the job. I was seeing things from the perspective of someone much younger, without the prospect of advancing to Level 35 PA pay as a Flt Lt and with the rather questionable benefits of an AFPS 15 pension at whatever age it will be paid out.
If there is little point in serving until age 55 given the pension gap & the intent is only to do 5 more years to amortise the FRI then frankly it makes more sense to jump earlier & take whatever lump sum you're entitled to when you go instead of the FRI with the expectation that your 'lack of loyalty' will be rewarded through additional seniority over the coming years.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Up North (for now)
Age: 62
Posts: 202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are The Wheels Coming Off
Rumour has it (well this is PPRuNe after all) that some Career Stream WSO Sqn Ldrs with 'specialist' skillsets (eg ASQ) who have had all previous requests to go PAS turned down flat, are now being offered the chance to transfer to PAS.
Not only that, under the NEM (New Employment Model) they are also being offered the chance to serve to age 60.
First off, I assume that this is conclusive proof that Manning has failed miserably to keep control of their 'levers'.
Secondly, wtf were the likes of me that had the same 'specialist' skillset made redundant last year!
Not only that, under the NEM (New Employment Model) they are also being offered the chance to serve to age 60.
First off, I assume that this is conclusive proof that Manning has failed miserably to keep control of their 'levers'.
Secondly, wtf were the likes of me that had the same 'specialist' skillset made redundant last year!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 146 Likes
on
28 Posts
zedder,
I guess timing is everything - last year your branch was presumably in surplus so even though they might have foreseen a future shortfall they had to cut numbers.
Logical or sensible it isn't!
I guess timing is everything - last year your branch was presumably in surplus so even though they might have foreseen a future shortfall they had to cut numbers.
Logical or sensible it isn't!
Rumour has it (well this is PPRuNe after all) that some Career Stream WSO Sqn Ldrs with 'specialist' skillsets (eg ASQ) who have had all previous requests to go PAS turned down flat, are now being offered the chance to transfer to PAS.
Not only that, under the NEM (New Employment Model) they are also being offered the chance to serve to age 60.
We make it difficult for ourselves sometimes.
zedder,
JTO is correct with the exception that the PAS offer, which was pretty much available to anyone who wanted it, was still capped at age 49. I suspect this was based on so many pilots turning down the offer in the first place, leaving the WSO empire to fill those all important staff jobs!
JTO is correct with the exception that the PAS offer, which was pretty much available to anyone who wanted it, was still capped at age 49. I suspect this was based on so many pilots turning down the offer in the first place, leaving the WSO empire to fill those all important staff jobs!
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: England
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As PAS do not have flying pay I assume they are not affected by the rule that if you fill a non-flying related post for over two years you lose your flying pay after the two year point.
Does it not follow then, for pilots at least, that by accepting a PAS offer you may be locking yourself into consecutive desk jobs with no immediate hope of returning to flying duties? I knew a PAS Sqn Ldr who was in his third desk job having tried to get back flying at every opportunity; he eventually got flying but only on loan-service with another Air Force.
As PAS could you not potentially become the Desk Officer's 'Joker Card' for those difficult to fill posts?
Does it not follow then, for pilots at least, that by accepting a PAS offer you may be locking yourself into consecutive desk jobs with no immediate hope of returning to flying duties? I knew a PAS Sqn Ldr who was in his third desk job having tried to get back flying at every opportunity; he eventually got flying but only on loan-service with another Air Force.
As PAS could you not potentially become the Desk Officer's 'Joker Card' for those difficult to fill posts?
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 146 Likes
on
28 Posts
Flt Lt PAS can only be employed in 'flying related jobs', which whilst that definition could be interpreted fairly liberally still restricts them to a flying station.
Sqn Ldr PAS however can be employed in 'non-flying related jobs' so yes, they can expect to be routinely occupying staff jobs. A discussion with the current poster some time ago ndicated that Sqn Ldr PAS can expect to be in a flying job roughly one tour in 4 as I recall, so your acquaintance's experience would be about right.
Sqn Ldr PAS however can be employed in 'non-flying related jobs' so yes, they can expect to be routinely occupying staff jobs. A discussion with the current poster some time ago ndicated that Sqn Ldr PAS can expect to be in a flying job roughly one tour in 4 as I recall, so your acquaintance's experience would be about right.
Flt Lt PAS can only be employed in 'flying related jobs', which whilst that definition could be interpreted fairly liberally still restricts them to a flying station.
One mate turned down promotion to sqn ldr several years ago specifically to avoid the situation you mention in your second paragraph. However, as Manning told him, he couldn't turn down acting rank and subsequently found himself at HQ Air doing a crap staff job as an acting sqn ldr!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: In the State of Denial
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 146 Likes
on
28 Posts
Stitching you with acting rank I can understand, just one of the ways that Manning have to get you in the end.
I struggle to see how they could post someone to an HQ & argue that the job was 'flying related'? Ultimately any job in the RAF ostensibly contributes to the role of the service & could therefore be deemed 'flying related' but the fact that they have differentiated 'flying' & 'non-flying' would imply to me at least (simple soul that I am) that the former must directly be related to the aviation task. Sim instructor? Ok. HQ Staff wallah? Not ok.
To fill Staff jobs with PAS Flt Lts would surely go against the purpose of expensively retaining experienced aircrew?
I struggle to see how they could post someone to an HQ & argue that the job was 'flying related'? Ultimately any job in the RAF ostensibly contributes to the role of the service & could therefore be deemed 'flying related' but the fact that they have differentiated 'flying' & 'non-flying' would imply to me at least (simple soul that I am) that the former must directly be related to the aviation task. Sim instructor? Ok. HQ Staff wallah? Not ok.
To fill Staff jobs with PAS Flt Lts would surely go against the purpose of expensively retaining experienced aircrew?