NEM And the rumour of a proposed new redundancy rule
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NEM And the rumour of a proposed new redundancy rule
not been able to enjoy the delights of an NEM brief as i have been enjoying yhe delights abroad, and much of the guidance online (dii) seems to be focussing more on senior officers spinning dits about how this all is not supposedly a means of cutting personnel budgets.
I have been hearing nasty rumours that one of the proposals is effectively bringing us into line with civilian practice regarding compulsory redundancy. as someone who was considering PA until i heard this, can anyone positively confirm or deny that the introduction of a 12 month notice before statutory redundancy is being considered, outside of SDSR and the like?
i have seen a few comments on here along the lines of 'its done in the private sector so suck it up'.
if this is the case, I take it the employment relations act of 1999 is going to be modified to allow full access to private sector equivalent employment tribunals and legal rights to persue unfair dismissal then, to make sure someone up top doesnt make a bunch of us redundant just prior to a significant pensions point to save a few quid on pensions?
http://www.forcespensionsociety.org/...que-nature.pdf
i suggest anyone involved in making these changes have a good read of the above. i have heard the bell at manning has started to ring again. coincidence? possibly, but with all that is currently going on, the bale that broke the camels back springs to mind.
I have been hearing nasty rumours that one of the proposals is effectively bringing us into line with civilian practice regarding compulsory redundancy. as someone who was considering PA until i heard this, can anyone positively confirm or deny that the introduction of a 12 month notice before statutory redundancy is being considered, outside of SDSR and the like?
i have seen a few comments on here along the lines of 'its done in the private sector so suck it up'.
if this is the case, I take it the employment relations act of 1999 is going to be modified to allow full access to private sector equivalent employment tribunals and legal rights to persue unfair dismissal then, to make sure someone up top doesnt make a bunch of us redundant just prior to a significant pensions point to save a few quid on pensions?
http://www.forcespensionsociety.org/...que-nature.pdf
i suggest anyone involved in making these changes have a good read of the above. i have heard the bell at manning has started to ring again. coincidence? possibly, but with all that is currently going on, the bale that broke the camels back springs to mind.
Last edited by VinRouge; 15th Aug 2013 at 12:23.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Middle England
Posts: 546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The rumour is true. Looking at manning adding adhoc redundancy to the 'manning levers golfbag'. So if you are superfluous to requirements Manning can make you redundant with a 12 month lead time on statutory terms.
Vin, the rumours are true but there has been quite a visceral reaction from the RAF consultation so far. This tool is 'needed' for the army but there is a slow recognition that just the mention of it will lead to a retention hit in the RAF.
There is no point in dangling a carrot of additional service, PAS, promotion et al if there is a chance of being booted-out just before you qualify for whatever you have signed up to.
That said, we still have to overcome the inertia of some VSOs who think we will sign up for additional service based on trust or loyalty. Sadly we all know of people who were made redundant just shy of their PAS qualifying point and now receive a pension based on their original single-list flt lt/sqn ldr pay. The mere fact that we are now short of people in the very areas we made redundant also shows we have a poor track-record of getting such decisions right. Inertia in the system is good if we are to survive the next Clive Loader moment.
It is also true that there are some that compare this to civilian life and this comparison is also wide of the mark. I am struggling to think of a civilian company that would promote you and then boot you out x-years later and then give you a package based on what your terms were pre-promotion or pay-rise x-years ago. In all cases they would have access to the courts - is this something we want?
Lets hope common sense prevails as I doubt the RAF can afford the 'transaction' rates of pay that it is currently driving towards.
There is no point in dangling a carrot of additional service, PAS, promotion et al if there is a chance of being booted-out just before you qualify for whatever you have signed up to.
That said, we still have to overcome the inertia of some VSOs who think we will sign up for additional service based on trust or loyalty. Sadly we all know of people who were made redundant just shy of their PAS qualifying point and now receive a pension based on their original single-list flt lt/sqn ldr pay. The mere fact that we are now short of people in the very areas we made redundant also shows we have a poor track-record of getting such decisions right. Inertia in the system is good if we are to survive the next Clive Loader moment.
It is also true that there are some that compare this to civilian life and this comparison is also wide of the mark. I am struggling to think of a civilian company that would promote you and then boot you out x-years later and then give you a package based on what your terms were pre-promotion or pay-rise x-years ago. In all cases they would have access to the courts - is this something we want?
Lets hope common sense prevails as I doubt the RAF can afford the 'transaction' rates of pay that it is currently driving towards.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the general consensus on the line is that unless fri post tax hit in the region of 130k, its just not worth staying in.
take your pension, thats about 8k post tax for most top level flt lts on 75. factor in civilian comparable wages, the fact the market is finally showing signs of recovery, then factor the norse of constantly fighting the allowances section who keep on making up new rules, and the general inability to plan ones life, an all in all, even 130k over 5 years post tax isnt that attractive. most wives now work meaning you can take the risk of going to single salary, especially with the gratuity in tow, even if you dont get a flying job i dont know a single person who has left and not scooped a job earning 80% or more of their former salary, not including pension in short order.
chance of a 100k+ net fri for 5 years? not much.
esprit de corps? not much about at the moment and morale is going to take a major dip imho post herrick once we are forgotten about once again.
take your pension, thats about 8k post tax for most top level flt lts on 75. factor in civilian comparable wages, the fact the market is finally showing signs of recovery, then factor the norse of constantly fighting the allowances section who keep on making up new rules, and the general inability to plan ones life, an all in all, even 130k over 5 years post tax isnt that attractive. most wives now work meaning you can take the risk of going to single salary, especially with the gratuity in tow, even if you dont get a flying job i dont know a single person who has left and not scooped a job earning 80% or more of their former salary, not including pension in short order.
chance of a 100k+ net fri for 5 years? not much.
esprit de corps? not much about at the moment and morale is going to take a major dip imho post herrick once we are forgotten about once again.
Last edited by VinRouge; 15th Aug 2013 at 13:41.
esprit de corps? not much about at the moment and morale is going to take a major dip imho post herrick once we are forgotten about once again.
The post-HERRICK universe is looking pretty bleak. For many fleets their core hours have been sliced back so far that they are now completely dependant on HERRICK hours to keep them viable. The 'brave financial decisions' of the past were wrapped in the protective HERRICK hours bundle. It is only when this last last plastic straw is removed from the VSO's game of flying-KerPlunk will we truly see the damage that has been done. I expect crews, squadrons and fleets to be lost just to keep a miserly flying rate just about possible.
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: The guest house
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I attended an NEM brief where redundancy was discussed.
Apparently there has always been the lever to make people redundant at any time and looking back there is an Armed Forces Redundancy Scheme (AFRS), it just changes over time (much like the pension) to adjust to current requirements (mass redundancies!) and has a different year of implementation at the end. It was briefed that this is a lever that is rarely, if ever, used within the RAF but not to the future use of redundancy.
As to PAS and the NEM, the new T's & C's of Service don't show PAS or a requirement for it with graduated lengths of offers to extend at certain points in your career, remaining on the general list. I was too slow at the brief to consider asking about it. If your exit date is after NEM implementation, even with an offer to transfer to PAS, PAS may not be available to transfer to so would be a busted flush. PAS would remain for those who transfer just prior to NEM implementation. As a caveat, that is my interpretation of the future manning T's & C's from the "cigarette" career/rank structure within the presentation but it is yet to be confirmed or denied.
Apparently there has always been the lever to make people redundant at any time and looking back there is an Armed Forces Redundancy Scheme (AFRS), it just changes over time (much like the pension) to adjust to current requirements (mass redundancies!) and has a different year of implementation at the end. It was briefed that this is a lever that is rarely, if ever, used within the RAF but not to the future use of redundancy.
As to PAS and the NEM, the new T's & C's of Service don't show PAS or a requirement for it with graduated lengths of offers to extend at certain points in your career, remaining on the general list. I was too slow at the brief to consider asking about it. If your exit date is after NEM implementation, even with an offer to transfer to PAS, PAS may not be available to transfer to so would be a busted flush. PAS would remain for those who transfer just prior to NEM implementation. As a caveat, that is my interpretation of the future manning T's & C's from the "cigarette" career/rank structure within the presentation but it is yet to be confirmed or denied.
G_22, I did ask questions regarding PAS but received precious little back apart from nervous smiles and an admission that not much work had been done. However, 'L-J' attended a later brief at a different station and I understand PAS was mentioned and the revised slides included sqn ldr aircrew to age 60.
Not all hope is lost, just most of it.
Not all hope is lost, just most of it.
These redundancy levers worry me. My understanding is they want to use them in the future to get rid of unexpected localised pools of manpower, so if your fleet takes a chop, so do you....
Those thinking that FRIs might do the trick; remember that if you're a mid-30s Flt Lt like me wondering about promotion/PAS, any FRI that is less than £80k net doesn't even fill the whole left by the transfer to AFPS15....
So to actually profit to the tune of £120k, you'd need an FRI of £200k net. Chances of that...?
So to actually profit to the tune of £120k, you'd need an FRI of £200k net. Chances of that...?
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Closer than you think...
Age: 65
Posts: 390
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vin, the rumours are true but there has been quite a visceral reaction from the RAF consultation so far. This tool is 'needed' for the army but there is a slow recognition that just the mention of it will lead to a retention hit in the RAF.
It's not needed for any of the services, but while we are on the subject I would have thought it would fit in with the RAF very well...
I mean, initial thoughts go along the lines of it fitting in very well when say a fleet of Aircraft are chopped and we end up with a lot of Aircrew hitching a lift home having just dropped the frame off at the breakers... Or then theres the ground based engineers now without something to maintain... etc etc
Just saying thats all...
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not needed for any of the services, but while we are on the subject I would have thought it would fit in with the RAF very well...
I mean, initial thoughts go along the lines of it fitting in very well when say a fleet of Aircraft are chopped and we end up with a lot of Aircrew hitching a lift home having just dropped the frame off at the breakers... Or then theres the ground based engineers now without something to maintain... etc etc
Just saying thats all...
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: In the Ether
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Without getting into the inter-Service baiting....
The trouble seems to be that Manning need saving from themselves. We're about to see the full effect of the apparently well-considered triple-tranche redundancies and, guess what, they may not be quite as planned!
If the 12 month tool is there, the troops need assurance about exactly what scenarios it will be used in and what their legal rights are in order to prevent it becoming a severely negative factor.
Job security is still THE major attraction for many, please let that be remembered post-consultation.
The trouble seems to be that Manning need saving from themselves. We're about to see the full effect of the apparently well-considered triple-tranche redundancies and, guess what, they may not be quite as planned!
If the 12 month tool is there, the troops need assurance about exactly what scenarios it will be used in and what their legal rights are in order to prevent it becoming a severely negative factor.
Job security is still THE major attraction for many, please let that be remembered post-consultation.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,117
Received 2,957 Likes
on
1,261 Posts
It's not needed for any of the services, but while we are on the subject I would have thought it would fit in with the RAF very well...
I mean, initial thoughts go along the lines of it fitting in very well when say a fleet of Aircraft are chopped and we end up with a lot of Aircrew hitching a lift home having just dropped the frame off at the breakers... Or then theres the ground based engineers now without something to maintain... etc etc
Just saying thats all...
I mean, initial thoughts go along the lines of it fitting in very well when say a fleet of Aircraft are chopped and we end up with a lot of Aircrew hitching a lift home having just dropped the frame off at the breakers... Or then theres the ground based engineers now without something to maintain... etc etc
Just saying thats all...
Or does quality and achievers no longer come into the equation.
Last edited by NutLoose; 15th Aug 2013 at 21:23.
JTO, it's not often I perk up on here but I take extreme umbrage at your inference that this 'tool' is needed for the Army but not for the RAF...
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Scotland
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The introduction of an additional manpower control measure is being considered. In essence the service will have the right to terminate your service with 12 months notice (as they have done for the current round of redundancies). The premise is that any termination will be compensated and as a result of a defined service need and set of rules, and would usually be as a result off a capability reduction and after they have tried to retrain those individuals affected. The principle is not that different to the redundancy measure we have now and far better to the current QRs that allow instant and uncompensated termination. They also briefed about a career review point but did stress that this wasn't favoured by the RAF.
The explanation for its introduction is that current manning levers are inadequate (ET waiting times, continuance, PCs etc) and trying to introduce a redundancy programme takes too long. The above MCM provides greater flexibility for the service. I gather that it has received some considerable feedback, but links to employment relations act etc don't apply to us. Would we then be able to give a months notice, by right, as some seem to bring up - tbh I doubt it as the RAF just cant reconfigure so quickly due to the long lead in times in terms of training.
The aspect I struggle with is the compensation bit. I think the new redundancy scheme will only provide for a 3 month pay compensation - this doesn't seem to be fair and I certainly have fed back that this element should be reviewed in tandem with the introduction of the MCM. As the current scheme is a 9 month pay off this does seem far fairer and probably reasonable too in the current economic climate.
JTO & Guest 22 - the aspect of PAS is that it is a defined pay spine and not an engagement structure, hence why it wasn't included in the revised engagement structures slides. As aircrew you should expect to be employed in accordance with the Flying Branch slides. So Flt Lt after OCU to EDP, promotion to Sqn Ldr to 60. From what I have discussed with the NEM team at AIR is that PAS will be retained as it works and is a useful retention tool. The Pay team have also inferred that they don't expect PAS to alter.
The explanation for its introduction is that current manning levers are inadequate (ET waiting times, continuance, PCs etc) and trying to introduce a redundancy programme takes too long. The above MCM provides greater flexibility for the service. I gather that it has received some considerable feedback, but links to employment relations act etc don't apply to us. Would we then be able to give a months notice, by right, as some seem to bring up - tbh I doubt it as the RAF just cant reconfigure so quickly due to the long lead in times in terms of training.
The aspect I struggle with is the compensation bit. I think the new redundancy scheme will only provide for a 3 month pay compensation - this doesn't seem to be fair and I certainly have fed back that this element should be reviewed in tandem with the introduction of the MCM. As the current scheme is a 9 month pay off this does seem far fairer and probably reasonable too in the current economic climate.
JTO & Guest 22 - the aspect of PAS is that it is a defined pay spine and not an engagement structure, hence why it wasn't included in the revised engagement structures slides. As aircrew you should expect to be employed in accordance with the Flying Branch slides. So Flt Lt after OCU to EDP, promotion to Sqn Ldr to 60. From what I have discussed with the NEM team at AIR is that PAS will be retained as it works and is a useful retention tool. The Pay team have also inferred that they don't expect PAS to alter.
Last edited by junket; 17th Aug 2013 at 15:15.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Closer than you think...
Age: 65
Posts: 390
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JTO, it's not often I perk up on here but I take extreme umbrage at your inference that this 'tool' is needed for the Army but not for the RAF...
Quo Fas et Gloria Ducunt
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As the current scheme is a 9 month pay off this does seem far fairer and probably reasonable too in the current economic climate.
Last edited by VinRouge; 17th Aug 2013 at 11:13.