UK Minister calls for pay increase for servicemen
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Fletcher Memorial Home
Age: 59
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes ^^^^^^^^^ if true, this could be very interesting. But also, it could well play into into the hands of Jeremy Goblin and Diane Abacus as well. Let’s face it, someone who tells Russia to “Go away and shut up” may not be the most politically astute!
Give me £20billion or I'll bring you down: Defence Secretary’s astonishing threat to Theresa May in bitter row over military cuts
- Formidable array of political and military figures are lining up behind Gavin Williamson in his power struggle with No 10
- He has warned the PM that if she did not commit an extra £20 billion to the Ministry of Defence then Tory MPs would vote down the next Budget
- According to one source, Mr Williamson promised to ‘crush’ the Treasury over the issue
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Mr Williamson may be a real contender for the leadership. There is something about him that reminds me of Cameron. Lets face it, the cabinet smell blood and all want a piece of the action. I would much prefer someone fresh than troiks like Davis, Boris or Hammond.
I think Mr Williamson may be a real contender for the leadership. There is something about him that reminds me of Cameron. Lets face it, the cabinet smell blood and all want a piece of the action. I would much prefer someone fresh than troiks like Davis, Boris or Hammond.
OAP
MOD CS pay award to be announced ... this could be interesting.
Hearing rumours from well placed sources that the CS element of Defence will be getting an offer between 1-1.5%, with a reminder that anything above 1% means money coming from elsewhere. The offer will of course be subject to Union agreement.
And given the other sectors have been getting full inflationary rises or more, I don’t see the Unions being in a hurry to write thank you notes given the pressure we’re under, the years of pay restraint and the current 2.4% rate of inflation.
It will also make giving the military any more much harder if they want to play the ‘whole force card’, which they have been doing a lot in recent times.
I think its going to be an interesting summer for Defence funding if this turns out to be correct.
Hearing rumours from well placed sources that the CS element of Defence will be getting an offer between 1-1.5%, with a reminder that anything above 1% means money coming from elsewhere. The offer will of course be subject to Union agreement.
And given the other sectors have been getting full inflationary rises or more, I don’t see the Unions being in a hurry to write thank you notes given the pressure we’re under, the years of pay restraint and the current 2.4% rate of inflation.
It will also make giving the military any more much harder if they want to play the ‘whole force card’, which they have been doing a lot in recent times.
I think its going to be an interesting summer for Defence funding if this turns out to be correct.
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: stoke
Age: 61
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MOD CS pay award to be announced ... this could be interesting.
Hearing rumours from well placed sources that the CS element of Defence will be getting an offer between 1-1.5%, with a reminder that anything above 1% means money coming from elsewhere. The offer will of course be subject to Union agreement.
And given the other sectors have been getting full inflationary rises or more, I don’t see the Unions being in a hurry to write thank you notes given the pressure we’re under, the years of pay restraint and the current 2.4% rate of inflation.
It will also make giving the military any more much harder if they want to play the ‘whole force card’, which they have been doing a lot in recent times.
I think its going to be an interesting summer for Defence funding if this turns out to be correct.
Hearing rumours from well placed sources that the CS element of Defence will be getting an offer between 1-1.5%, with a reminder that anything above 1% means money coming from elsewhere. The offer will of course be subject to Union agreement.
And given the other sectors have been getting full inflationary rises or more, I don’t see the Unions being in a hurry to write thank you notes given the pressure we’re under, the years of pay restraint and the current 2.4% rate of inflation.
It will also make giving the military any more much harder if they want to play the ‘whole force card’, which they have been doing a lot in recent times.
I think its going to be an interesting summer for Defence funding if this turns out to be correct.
world wide web.'theguardian com/politics/2018/jun/26/no 10 intervenes in row over armed forces pay rise'. Add hyphens
Hmm, funny how this particular pay issue never makes it on to BBC News. I guess it is because there is no organisation that can
make the case on Services' pay (The AFPRB is in my view the Government's poodle). At least the FPS does its best on pensions
make the case on Services' pay (The AFPRB is in my view the Government's poodle). At least the FPS does its best on pensions
AFPRB is independent from the MoD; it is not independent of government.
The case for service pay used to be laid-out by the service chiefs. The Treasury effectively neutered them years ago by awarding the funding for the coming year many months before the ARPRB produced its findings. If the AFPRB recommendation is ever above the Treasury prediction/cap/limit (aka Comprehensive Spending Review) then the missing balance has to be found from the MoDs existing budget - effectively triggering further unplanned cuts. The net effect is that the service chiefs are rather reluctant to support any pay rise that could be above the amount already stipulated by the Treasury Spending Review.
As such, the scales are tipped away from any effective pay rise. The only variation is the AFPRB excuse-of-the-year to magically arrive at the same figure stipulated by the government before the pay review board even starts. The only possible change is when politicians feel the need to increase military pay. Amazingly the AFPRB will somehow arrive at this exact same politically driven percentage. About the only exception to this was the X-factor increase a few years back that neither the Treasury or MoD were expecting. The bun-fight lasted well into the new financial year and the then Chair of the AFPRB lost his seat.
The case for service pay used to be laid-out by the service chiefs. The Treasury effectively neutered them years ago by awarding the funding for the coming year many months before the ARPRB produced its findings. If the AFPRB recommendation is ever above the Treasury prediction/cap/limit (aka Comprehensive Spending Review) then the missing balance has to be found from the MoDs existing budget - effectively triggering further unplanned cuts. The net effect is that the service chiefs are rather reluctant to support any pay rise that could be above the amount already stipulated by the Treasury Spending Review.
As such, the scales are tipped away from any effective pay rise. The only variation is the AFPRB excuse-of-the-year to magically arrive at the same figure stipulated by the government before the pay review board even starts. The only possible change is when politicians feel the need to increase military pay. Amazingly the AFPRB will somehow arrive at this exact same politically driven percentage. About the only exception to this was the X-factor increase a few years back that neither the Treasury or MoD were expecting. The bun-fight lasted well into the new financial year and the then Chair of the AFPRB lost his seat.
Well if The Gruaniad is correct and No10 has waded in, our pay is now political and about SoS’ ambitions for the future as anything else. Melchies’ potential COAs for what they’re worth:
1. SoS digs in hard and we all get 3% this year. Following years we get 1% if lucky for several years as punishment, potentially the remainder of this Parliament. Importantly whilst SoS has bought some brownie points with the troops and a few pro- Forces back benchers but his wider reputation is shot and he lacks support for a future bid.
2. SoS compromises and a few lower paid ranks or pinch points get 3% whilst the rest get 1-1.5%. Another sub-inflationary rise irritates the troops but he has maybe preserved some equity in the party and portrays himself as the Squaddies’ Champion by boosting pay for the lowest ranks. Future rises limited but not to the same extent as in COA 1.
3. SoS plays the long game, both for his political ambitions and future pay, and we all get 1.5 - 2%. Although sub-inflationary he claims credit for lifting the 1% pay cap and buys a lot of brownie points for sticking up for Defence whilst also showing himself to be a team player and banks support for a future leadership challenge.
My money is on COA 3. He is a politician after all.
1. SoS digs in hard and we all get 3% this year. Following years we get 1% if lucky for several years as punishment, potentially the remainder of this Parliament. Importantly whilst SoS has bought some brownie points with the troops and a few pro- Forces back benchers but his wider reputation is shot and he lacks support for a future bid.
2. SoS compromises and a few lower paid ranks or pinch points get 3% whilst the rest get 1-1.5%. Another sub-inflationary rise irritates the troops but he has maybe preserved some equity in the party and portrays himself as the Squaddies’ Champion by boosting pay for the lowest ranks. Future rises limited but not to the same extent as in COA 1.
3. SoS plays the long game, both for his political ambitions and future pay, and we all get 1.5 - 2%. Although sub-inflationary he claims credit for lifting the 1% pay cap and buys a lot of brownie points for sticking up for Defence whilst also showing himself to be a team player and banks support for a future leadership challenge.
My money is on COA 3. He is a politician after all.
Well if The Gruaniad is correct and No10 has waded in, our pay is now political and about SoS’ ambitions for the future as anything else. Melchies’ potential COAs for what they’re worth:
3. SoS plays the long game, both for his political ambitions and future pay, and we all get 1.5 - 2%. Although sub-inflationary he claims credit for lifting the 1% pay cap and buys a lot of brownie points for sticking up for Defence whilst also showing himself to be a team player and banks support for a future leadership challenge.
My money is on COA 3. He is a politician after all.
3. SoS plays the long game, both for his political ambitions and future pay, and we all get 1.5 - 2%. Although sub-inflationary he claims credit for lifting the 1% pay cap and buys a lot of brownie points for sticking up for Defence whilst also showing himself to be a team player and banks support for a future leadership challenge.
My money is on COA 3. He is a politician after all.
OAP
I suspect your 3 as well. TMay has proved herself to be a fudger's fudger. I also suspect she will do the same with the overall Defence spend. There will be no serious chopping or rationalisation of capabilities to match requirements budget, just 2% GDP spend continued and SoS for Defence told to make it all work with trimming at the edges (despite this being to the detriment of all!). I will be very surprised if the overall results of the pay review and the Defence review are anything more than......a fudge!
OAP
OAP
There are those that say that they get a rise then it is taken off with Quarter charges. Surely, moving out to your own home is the way to beat that? Even if you rent your house for what you pay for the Quarter, as long as you are on a repayment mortgage, you are still winning as the value of your property goes up?
There are those that say that they get a rise then it is taken off with Quarter charges. Surely, moving out to your own home is the way to beat that? Even if you rent your house for what you pay for the Quarter, as long as you are on a repayment mortgage, you are still winning as the value of your property goes up?
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Aylesbury
Age: 58
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For what its worth, I would have used the term "Service Personnel" because of it has always struck me as an appropriate term to use. But am I going to criticize someone for using servicemen or servicewomen instead? No. My life is not that sad, empty, boring and meaningless that I have to project my SJW inadequacies and political prejudices onto someone elses words when it is plainly obvious what it is referring to in the first place.
Back to the Grauniad for you, mate. I'm sure Owen Jones or Polly T or some other such "commentator" has something that appeals to your perspective within its erstwhile pages...
