NEM offer to transfer?
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: lyneham, wilts, Uk
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NEM offer to transfer?
This week I have received 2 offers to transfer on to the NEM the first offer was for less time than I have already served the second offer for 18 mnts longer than I have already served. The second offer informed me that if I decided to reject this offer I would automatically transfer on to the original offer. Reading the latest paperwork it leaves me with the impression that the offer of alignment is aimed to increase time served..... Not reduce it ..... As I'm on PAS till 55 I'm sat here wondering wether I do nothing.. Or I'm compelled to take the offer.... Any thoughts?
Last edited by ukcds; 18th Feb 2015 at 18:38.
I would like to redress your implied comment on FTRS and respite tours. Firstly take a look at the latest defence statistics:
https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...port_jan15.pdf
At table 4 you will see there are 830 FTRS personnel in the RAF with 210 Volunteer Reserve and 620 Regular Reserve (ie. Ex Regulars). Of the 830, 340 are Officers and 490 are ORs - table 5a. The current manpower requirement for the RAF as of 1 Jan 15 is 34,210 and FTRS make up 830 posts - this is less than 2.5% of the requirement (so it is hardly a major issue in my opinion).
Furthermore, FTRS is open to anyone with previous service and so if you want to apply then you can - it may not quite be the 'respite' tour you describe, though (see my later comments). You can serve at a lower rank, the same rank or a higher rank (if you have the promotion recommendation) - so if promotion is poor in the Regulars then why not go FTRS? Also, you can now have up to a 9 year contract and when we go to AFPS15 you will be able to transfer directly between pensions and continue earning into the same pot. 9 years can offer massive continuity to posts that need them and stop the constant 'churn' and the need to 're-invent the wheel'.
Finally, granted, it does offer you more stability at home (which is why we get 1/2 or no X-Factor) but you still need to work hard. We tend to take up the slack for the Regulars - I'm doing Stn Duty staff over the next BH and I worked the previous Christmas and New Year. I know a fellow FTRS officer is doing this coming Easter to 'spring' a Regular "bean stealer" from the Mess so that they can go home to their family. I also carried over 25 days of leave as I was unable to take it by being 'pegged' against a national standby commitment for over 9 months which was outside of my normal duties. I could have declined to do it, but then I might not get my contract renewed; so FTRS aren't able to sit idly by whilst the Regulars suck up all the cr@p - you still have to pull with the rest of the team! The advantage is that you go home to your family most nights.
What's not to like? Rather than imply it is a bad thing then why not embrace it for what it might bring? FTRS is different, but I propose that it offers more advantages to the Service and its members than it does disadvantage the Regular majority.
LJ
https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...port_jan15.pdf
At table 4 you will see there are 830 FTRS personnel in the RAF with 210 Volunteer Reserve and 620 Regular Reserve (ie. Ex Regulars). Of the 830, 340 are Officers and 490 are ORs - table 5a. The current manpower requirement for the RAF as of 1 Jan 15 is 34,210 and FTRS make up 830 posts - this is less than 2.5% of the requirement (so it is hardly a major issue in my opinion).
Furthermore, FTRS is open to anyone with previous service and so if you want to apply then you can - it may not quite be the 'respite' tour you describe, though (see my later comments). You can serve at a lower rank, the same rank or a higher rank (if you have the promotion recommendation) - so if promotion is poor in the Regulars then why not go FTRS? Also, you can now have up to a 9 year contract and when we go to AFPS15 you will be able to transfer directly between pensions and continue earning into the same pot. 9 years can offer massive continuity to posts that need them and stop the constant 'churn' and the need to 're-invent the wheel'.
Finally, granted, it does offer you more stability at home (which is why we get 1/2 or no X-Factor) but you still need to work hard. We tend to take up the slack for the Regulars - I'm doing Stn Duty staff over the next BH and I worked the previous Christmas and New Year. I know a fellow FTRS officer is doing this coming Easter to 'spring' a Regular "bean stealer" from the Mess so that they can go home to their family. I also carried over 25 days of leave as I was unable to take it by being 'pegged' against a national standby commitment for over 9 months which was outside of my normal duties. I could have declined to do it, but then I might not get my contract renewed; so FTRS aren't able to sit idly by whilst the Regulars suck up all the cr@p - you still have to pull with the rest of the team! The advantage is that you go home to your family most nights.
What's not to like? Rather than imply it is a bad thing then why not embrace it for what it might bring? FTRS is different, but I propose that it offers more advantages to the Service and its members than it does disadvantage the Regular majority.
LJ
A couple of drawbacks - Many of the the FTRS posts/contracts are awarded against a specific post, so, if the post is canx then the system only has to give a specific period of notice (game over). Also, if a FTRS post is moved and you are not prepared to move with it, then again the system is not obliged to give you another job, and you will have to apply for another post with everyone else.
From a manning/command perspective, the notice period which has/can be given by the individual is also a lot less. Therefore, if an individual decides they no longer wish to continue, then the command chain has to go through the entire rigmarole of advertising and interviewing to find a replacement.
From a manning/command perspective, the notice period which has/can be given by the individual is also a lot less. Therefore, if an individual decides they no longer wish to continue, then the command chain has to go through the entire rigmarole of advertising and interviewing to find a replacement.
Last edited by Could be the last?; 20th Feb 2015 at 07:29.
CBTL
Not quite as I understand it. If your job is moved and it is 50 miles of where you live then you will be expected to move (seems reasonable) or it is 'game over'. If your job folds and there is another FTRS vacancy, that you are qualified to do, is paying the same (or better if you're promotable) and it is within 50 miles of where you live then you will be offered it - if you refuse to accept then it is 'game over'. If there is nothing within 50 miles then you're right, there is no obligation.
These types of T&Cs are way better than you would expect in 'civvy street' and so I really don't accept them as significant drawbacks. There are ups and downs to all employment contracts, but FTRS on the whole works well for most individuals and the Service.
IMHO, of course.
LJ
Not quite as I understand it. If your job is moved and it is 50 miles of where you live then you will be expected to move (seems reasonable) or it is 'game over'. If your job folds and there is another FTRS vacancy, that you are qualified to do, is paying the same (or better if you're promotable) and it is within 50 miles of where you live then you will be offered it - if you refuse to accept then it is 'game over'. If there is nothing within 50 miles then you're right, there is no obligation.
These types of T&Cs are way better than you would expect in 'civvy street' and so I really don't accept them as significant drawbacks. There are ups and downs to all employment contracts, but FTRS on the whole works well for most individuals and the Service.
IMHO, of course.
LJ
