No more FTC(A)?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No more FTC(A)?
Does anyone out there have information about why nobody is being offered FTC(A) this year? Heard rumours that FTC will be offered extensions to 60 so the Navy doesn't need more FTC(A) ?
I saw a letter from some dusty old Admiral saying nobody would be disadvantaged. As someone on the top pay band I am losing out by not being able to move across to FTC(A).
Why stay in until 60 with no pay increase or promotion prospects when oppo's on FTC(A) are doing the same job and getting annual pay rises and will almost certainly have to legally be also offered extensions to 60.
What's going on?
I saw a letter from some dusty old Admiral saying nobody would be disadvantaged. As someone on the top pay band I am losing out by not being able to move across to FTC(A).
Why stay in until 60 with no pay increase or promotion prospects when oppo's on FTC(A) are doing the same job and getting annual pay rises and will almost certainly have to legally be also offered extensions to 60.
What's going on?
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: somerset
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No more FTC(A)?
No more FTC (A) but keep a look out for FTC(55).... Same time served but without the pay.
Seems like it may be time to investigate how many clicks on JPA it takes.....
Seems like it may be time to investigate how many clicks on JPA it takes.....
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Again, another thread where it looks as though the manning people of the flying Fisheads are panicking or attempting some manpower control measures under the horizon.
We had the direct crewman thread and now what appears to be no PAS/Spec Aircrew for the FAA.
This does not appear to be a Tri-Service policy (I hope), and I assume that the Fisheads will still need experienced aviators in the cockpit, so why dis-incentivise them with a policy like this? If it is that all those senior officers are jealous of the the terms and conditions for the specialist aircrew, then why not incentivise those promoted to take on many of the rubbish jobs that come with promotion, especially as the number of Squadrons are reducing which means the chances of commanding anything is also reducing.
Just remind me why any experienced aircrew would now want to sign on to 55 or 60? Do the personnel people really think that they would opt for a second choice of trying for promotion. Because they were not thrusting in those early career years, instead gaining experience and having fun (which is not a dirty word), if they do get promoted they will probably be consigned to many years of the second and third tier jobs that no one wants and are not appealing to those career thrusters.
At least all of our PAS guys being lemoned with ground tours all know that they have a financial package that will make up for the lack of job satisfaction and will eventually return to the cockpit. Why would a Fishead do the same if there was nothing to balance the potential rubbish jobs? Also why get promoted as it looks as though NEM is going to shaft flying pay, and FAFPS has reduced pension incentive. Add into that the other (yet to be disclosed) detail of FAFPS and NEM and the pull factor does not equate or exceed the push factors.
If it is not jealousy or trying to balance those reluctant for promotion and purely an attempt to save money or appease the bean counters, then oh dear and this temporary solution will bite someone in the bum (just as the crewman fiasco appears to be).
At least (I think?) we have smelled the coffee and recognised the direction we were heading with our people a couple of years ago was the wrong one. It looks as though the Fisheads will now make the same mistakes, but where as we had a recession that kept many of us until those in charge realised the error of our ways, the Fisheads will be coping with a potentially buoyant and recovering employment market.
I always said that we would be forced by external forces for a Joint helicopter organisation, not by inter Service politics or by far reaching policy decisions, but simply either we didn't have enough (of the right) people or we didn't have enough machines (numbers of aircraft).
Good luck
We had the direct crewman thread and now what appears to be no PAS/Spec Aircrew for the FAA.
This does not appear to be a Tri-Service policy (I hope), and I assume that the Fisheads will still need experienced aviators in the cockpit, so why dis-incentivise them with a policy like this? If it is that all those senior officers are jealous of the the terms and conditions for the specialist aircrew, then why not incentivise those promoted to take on many of the rubbish jobs that come with promotion, especially as the number of Squadrons are reducing which means the chances of commanding anything is also reducing.
Just remind me why any experienced aircrew would now want to sign on to 55 or 60? Do the personnel people really think that they would opt for a second choice of trying for promotion. Because they were not thrusting in those early career years, instead gaining experience and having fun (which is not a dirty word), if they do get promoted they will probably be consigned to many years of the second and third tier jobs that no one wants and are not appealing to those career thrusters.
At least all of our PAS guys being lemoned with ground tours all know that they have a financial package that will make up for the lack of job satisfaction and will eventually return to the cockpit. Why would a Fishead do the same if there was nothing to balance the potential rubbish jobs? Also why get promoted as it looks as though NEM is going to shaft flying pay, and FAFPS has reduced pension incentive. Add into that the other (yet to be disclosed) detail of FAFPS and NEM and the pull factor does not equate or exceed the push factors.
If it is not jealousy or trying to balance those reluctant for promotion and purely an attempt to save money or appease the bean counters, then oh dear and this temporary solution will bite someone in the bum (just as the crewman fiasco appears to be).
At least (I think?) we have smelled the coffee and recognised the direction we were heading with our people a couple of years ago was the wrong one. It looks as though the Fisheads will now make the same mistakes, but where as we had a recession that kept many of us until those in charge realised the error of our ways, the Fisheads will be coping with a potentially buoyant and recovering employment market.
I always said that we would be forced by external forces for a Joint helicopter organisation, not by inter Service politics or by far reaching policy decisions, but simply either we didn't have enough (of the right) people or we didn't have enough machines (numbers of aircraft).
Good luck
Last edited by MaroonMan4; 2nd Mar 2014 at 07:41.
