AFPRB 2020
I get that, and from an individual point of view, that's absolutely fine. However from a service point of view it will only add to the discontent and decreasing numbers of people actually wanting to stay on in the service. The flying isn't as good as it was, the conditions are getting worse, the benefits are getting worse, the pension is worse ( back on track) and you earn as much as your admin/eng counterpart (In truth, less because they are probably promoted at that point) for the first 6 years (actually you don't start flying training the day you graduate you usually hold for a year or so, so actually more like 7 or 8 years).
The numbers are telling, FL pilots are actually leaving ( COVID might have done some 'good' for the numbers but its still true), more telling is that people are turning down promotion and removing themselves from QWI courses before they even start as they don't want to get tied into a longer RoS.
The numbers are telling, FL pilots are actually leaving ( COVID might have done some 'good' for the numbers but its still true), more telling is that people are turning down promotion and removing themselves from QWI courses before they even start as they don't want to get tied into a longer RoS.
Flying pay is a recruitment and retention payment. Was I "recruited" because of it? No, I didn't even know it was a thing when I filled out the application paper. The retention part is the bit that I disagree with, but understand, from a tax payers point of view. As a pilot am I more likely to stay in if I'm paid better from day 1 of being qualified? Probably, I can feather my nest from a younger age, holidays, cars, Sqn Breitlings and Bremonts, home etc etc but from a tax payers perspective, why is someone being given a retention payment when they don't need to be retained for the first 6 years as they are on a RoS contract? Add don't forget they will begin to receive Tier 1 after 6 years from starting flying training so could be getting RRP(F) before they're even qualified and useful, which upsets those that worked hard to pass the course to get the reward.
Perhaps it will take a generation or so to see if the change in flying pay is working as a retention incentive. I'm sure the closer to the 6 year point people get, the more they may become "I'll see how it goes".
And who knows what state the aviation industry will be in in 6 years time!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: England
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I heard yesterday that the 2015 pension for PAS doesn't take the RRP (extra) into account, is this true? I cannot find that. I.E. A Flt Lt earns 47k and 19k RRP, the Flt Lt PAS pension would be based on 47k even though the total wage would be 66k?
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Coventry
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fully concur with you and I am on your side of the fence in the crew room complaining, but allow me to play some devil's advocate if you will (I'm bored in isolation.)
Flying pay is a recruitment and retention payment. Was I "recruited" because of it? No, I didn't even know it was a thing when I filled out the application paper. The retention part is the bit that I disagree with, but understand, from a tax payers point of view. As a pilot am I more likely to stay in if I'm paid better from day 1 of being qualified? Probably, I can feather my nest from a younger age, holidays, cars, Sqn Breitlings and Bremonts, home etc etc but from a tax payers perspective, why is someone being given a retention payment when they don't need to be retained for the first 6 years as they are on a RoS contract? Add don't forget they will begin to receive Tier 1 after 6 years from starting flying training so could be getting RRP(F) before they're even qualified and useful, which upsets those that worked hard to pass the course to get the reward.
Perhaps it will take a generation or so to see if the change in flying pay is working as a retention incentive. I'm sure the closer to the 6 year point people get, the more they may become "I'll see how it goes".
And who knows what state the aviation industry will be in in 6 years time!
Flying pay is a recruitment and retention payment. Was I "recruited" because of it? No, I didn't even know it was a thing when I filled out the application paper. The retention part is the bit that I disagree with, but understand, from a tax payers point of view. As a pilot am I more likely to stay in if I'm paid better from day 1 of being qualified? Probably, I can feather my nest from a younger age, holidays, cars, Sqn Breitlings and Bremonts, home etc etc but from a tax payers perspective, why is someone being given a retention payment when they don't need to be retained for the first 6 years as they are on a RoS contract? Add don't forget they will begin to receive Tier 1 after 6 years from starting flying training so could be getting RRP(F) before they're even qualified and useful, which upsets those that worked hard to pass the course to get the reward.
Perhaps it will take a generation or so to see if the change in flying pay is working as a retention incentive. I'm sure the closer to the 6 year point people get, the more they may become "I'll see how it goes".
And who knows what state the aviation industry will be in in 6 years time!
Anyway, i think you are correct in 6 years we will see if it worked, they'd better hope it does as a Flt Lt maxes out pay bands after 7 years.
And not to mention the freebies/subsidised, dental, medical, gym, accommodation, scoff, world class flying training system etc 
This is only about pay if disparity in its award across a particular cohort persuades the person with the best combination of intellectual, leadership, managerial and physical gifts to leave. And if that person might in other circumstances have become CAS, that would appear to be an own goal from a Service perspective. It is made much worse if the route chosen for the individual (let's say F35) means their much-delayed arrival on the front line handicaps them in competition with less-capable contemporaries. If you have to hold for long enough, there is no way your age/rank profile will put you into the running for eg squadron or station command, as you will not have the time left to serve for the system to capitalise on its investment in you. Losing out on a job to someone who joined the same day as you but is less capable than you, and who is already £10K plus ahead of you in career earnings, is hardly an incentive to commit to an organisation that manages 'talent' that way.
I can think of one exceptionally gifted person who retired early as a sqn ldr, having realised the 4 years he had spent holding meant he would retire as a wg cdr at best. I was unable to help him, which is still a source of regret.
PS. Cohort is such a good word...
I can think of one exceptionally gifted person who retired early as a sqn ldr, having realised the 4 years he had spent holding meant he would retire as a wg cdr at best. I was unable to help him, which is still a source of regret.
PS. Cohort is such a good word...
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Leeds
Age: 71
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is only about pay if disparity in its award across a particular cohort persuades the person with the best combination of intellectual, leadership, managerial and physical gifts to leave. And if that person might in other circumstances have become CAS, that would appear to be an own goal from a Service perspective. It is made much worse if the route chosen for the individual (let's say F35) means their much-delayed arrival on the front line handicaps them in competition with less-capable contemporaries. If you have to hold for long enough, there is no way your age/rank profile will put you into the running for eg squadron or station command, as you will not have the time left to serve for the system to capitalise on its investment in you. Losing out on a job to someone who joined the same day as you but is less capable than you, and who is already £10K plus ahead of you in career earnings, is hardly an incentive to commit to an organisation that manages 'talent' that way.
I can think of one exceptionally gifted person who retired early as a sqn ldr, having realised the 4 years he had spent holding meant he would retire as a wg cdr at best. I was unable to help him, which is still a source of regret.
PS. Cohort is such a good word...
I can think of one exceptionally gifted person who retired early as a sqn ldr, having realised the 4 years he had spent holding meant he would retire as a wg cdr at best. I was unable to help him, which is still a source of regret.
PS. Cohort is such a good word...
One must remember that only FJ pilots can become senior Officers. All others should know their place, and try not to get in the way of the pre-ordained nature of "mates" getting promoted.
Chiefofdefence
I hear your points about leadership but can you honestly say that a non-aircrew Officer will really understand air power to a sufficient enough level to command an armed force whose primary role is the delivery of just that?
Many may take me to task on that issue but, pettiness aside, does anyone honestly think an adminer should be in charge of the RAF?
AtG. Andy Pulford might disagree with your last post. He might also ask you to remove the chip from your shoulder.
Whilst I understand your post was probably meant as banter, so was mine.
BV
Many may take me to task on that issue but, pettiness aside, does anyone honestly think an adminer should be in charge of the RAF?
AtG. Andy Pulford might disagree with your last post. He might also ask you to remove the chip from your shoulder.
Whilst I understand your post was probably meant as banter, so was mine.
BV
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Wilts
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hear your points about leadership but can you honestly say that a non-aircrew Officer will really understand air power to a sufficient enough level to command an armed force whose primary role is the delivery of just that?
Many may take me to task on that issue but, pettiness aside, does anyone honestly think an adminer should be in charge of the RAF?
AtG. Andy Pulford might disagree with your last post. He might also ask you to remove the chip from your shoulder.
Whilst I understand your post was probably meant as banter, so was mine.
BV
Many may take me to task on that issue but, pettiness aside, does anyone honestly think an adminer should be in charge of the RAF?
AtG. Andy Pulford might disagree with your last post. He might also ask you to remove the chip from your shoulder.
Whilst I understand your post was probably meant as banter, so was mine.
BV
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Coventry
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not familiar with the RAF way of doing business with regards to selection for PAS, but if a level 7 Flt Lt is on £50,957 base + £20,753 RRP(F) then they can't complain too much, with PAS they can go up to level 30, £81,701 pensionable. That's not bad considering they might just be a line QHI at Shawbury with their only responsibility being to stay awake through MATE brief after MATE brief monotony And not to mention the freebies/subsidised, dental, medical, gym, accommodation, scoff, world class flying training system etc
And not to mention the freebies/subsidised, dental, medical, gym, accommodation, scoff, world class flying training system etc ).
Bob,
your posts are almost invariably well reasoned and insightful, but this is a rare occasion where I disagree with your premise. While oversight of the actual employment of air power may require first-hand knowledge of the business of flying (so, Air Component Commander or DComOps) this is not the job of a CAS. Her (or his) role is the strategic leadership of the entire organisation and is almost always carried out in a peacetime environment where the ability to operate in a highly political, finance-driven, media-intensive environment and deliver the best long-term outcomes for a £6Bn, 30,000 strong organisations might not be related to hand-eye coordination capabilities at age 18.
That is not to say that some pilots couldn’t potentially do the job of course! However, many other branches spend a much higher proportion of their careers leading and managing people, money, infrastructure, contractors, and the public than the average pilot.
Merely as an example, we currently have a 3 star engineer in Town who many think would be an excellent CAS.
your posts are almost invariably well reasoned and insightful, but this is a rare occasion where I disagree with your premise. While oversight of the actual employment of air power may require first-hand knowledge of the business of flying (so, Air Component Commander or DComOps) this is not the job of a CAS. Her (or his) role is the strategic leadership of the entire organisation and is almost always carried out in a peacetime environment where the ability to operate in a highly political, finance-driven, media-intensive environment and deliver the best long-term outcomes for a £6Bn, 30,000 strong organisations might not be related to hand-eye coordination capabilities at age 18.
That is not to say that some pilots couldn’t potentially do the job of course! However, many other branches spend a much higher proportion of their careers leading and managing people, money, infrastructure, contractors, and the public than the average pilot.
Merely as an example, we currently have a 3 star engineer in Town who many think would be an excellent CAS.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: An Ivory Tower
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://des.mod.uk/new-director-general-air-announced/
I hear your points about leadership but can you honestly say that a non-aircrew Officer will really understand air power to a sufficient enough level to command an armed force whose primary role is the delivery of just that?
Many may take me to task on that issue but, pettiness aside, does anyone honestly think an adminer should be in charge of the RAF?
AtG. Andy Pulford might disagree with your last post. He might also ask you to remove the chip from your shoulder.
Whilst I understand your post was probably meant as banter, so was mine.
BV
Many may take me to task on that issue but, pettiness aside, does anyone honestly think an adminer should be in charge of the RAF?
AtG. Andy Pulford might disagree with your last post. He might also ask you to remove the chip from your shoulder.
Whilst I understand your post was probably meant as banter, so was mine.
BV
None of the pilots (or WSOs) want to achieve high rank, mainly because they'd have to stop flying fairly early on - because the route to the top now involves a combination of capability management experience with proven financial skills.
Given that that none of the sS Chiefs are used to direct combat power, I fail to understand why your spatial perception, 2.4km run time or hand eye co-ordination should be the ultimate filter to become one.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Jungle
Posts: 364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bob,
your posts are almost invariably well reasoned and insightful, but this is a rare occasion where I disagree with your premise. While oversight of the actual employment of air power may require first-hand knowledge of the business of flying (so, Air Component Commander or DComOps) this is not the job of a CAS. Her (or his) role is the strategic leadership of the entire organisation and is almost always carried out in a peacetime environment where the ability to operate in a highly political, finance-driven, media-intensive environment and deliver the best long-term outcomes for a £6Bn, 30,000 strong organisations might not be related to hand-eye coordination capabilities at age 18.
That is not to say that some pilots couldn’t potentially do the job of course! However, many other branches spend a much higher proportion of their careers leading and managing people, money, infrastructure, contractors, and the public than the average pilot.
Merely as an example, we currently have a 3 star engineer in Town who many think would be an excellent CAS.
your posts are almost invariably well reasoned and insightful, but this is a rare occasion where I disagree with your premise. While oversight of the actual employment of air power may require first-hand knowledge of the business of flying (so, Air Component Commander or DComOps) this is not the job of a CAS. Her (or his) role is the strategic leadership of the entire organisation and is almost always carried out in a peacetime environment where the ability to operate in a highly political, finance-driven, media-intensive environment and deliver the best long-term outcomes for a £6Bn, 30,000 strong organisations might not be related to hand-eye coordination capabilities at age 18.
That is not to say that some pilots couldn’t potentially do the job of course! However, many other branches spend a much higher proportion of their careers leading and managing people, money, infrastructure, contractors, and the public than the average pilot.
Merely as an example, we currently have a 3 star engineer in Town who many think would be an excellent CAS.
There are 2 aspects to this. The first being that a pilot inherently understands and has a visceral appreciation of the application of Air and Space Power; which, after all, is why the RAF exists.
Secondly, It would be reputationally embarrassing to not have a pilot command the RAF. That would be the view from many civilians that wouldn’t necessarily understand.
Foghorn,
I think Major General Tonje Skinnarland, a scopie, might disagree. The Norwegian public don't seem to have risen in revolt following her appointment either.
I think Major General Tonje Skinnarland, a scopie, might disagree. The Norwegian public don't seem to have risen in revolt following her appointment either.
Nope, BV is spot on.
There are 2 aspects to this. The first being that a pilot inherently understands and has a visceral appreciation of the application of Air and Space Power; which, after all, is why the RAF exists.
Secondly, It would be reputationally embarrassing to not have a pilot command the RAF. That would be the view from many civilians that wouldn’t necessarily understand.
There are 2 aspects to this. The first being that a pilot inherently understands and has a visceral appreciation of the application of Air and Space Power; which, after all, is why the RAF exists.
Secondly, It would be reputationally embarrassing to not have a pilot command the RAF. That would be the view from many civilians that wouldn’t necessarily understand.
and if you are, can I come and watch?
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Leeds
Age: 71
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the risk of thread-drift, I acknowledge that the requirement for aircrew to 'head' the organisation is worthy of debate however my observation is that the majority of the future 'leaders' of the RAF are effectively identified very early on in their careers primarily based on flying ability, not leadership ability. I was once told by a deskie that in order to have the 'reach' to get to CAS you need to be promoted to Sqn Ldr around the age of 30 - but what 'leadership' qualities have you displayed by then as aircrew? I've had many a conversation with flying colleagues about the concept of 'leadership in the air' (e.g. 4-ship lead) but to me this is more in line with management of a task (albeit very skilled management) rather than any ability to motivate, engage, develop etc. Indeed the most important box on the OJAR to my mind (if it still exists) when it comes to assessing leadership potential is the one that assesses 'subordinate development' - but what opportunity have aircrew had to display this? This is not to say that aircrew can't be good leaders, but that the behaviours they are selected, promoted and identified by early on in their careers are not necessarily the ones required to 'lead' the organisation at the more senior levels. Indeed I still recall a former VSO (3*?) addressing a leadership conference a couple of years ago effectively saying that he had got to the top by being the arrogant fighter pilot who knew how to do everything and that if he shouted louder people would jump higher and that's how he had been taught to do leadership (or words to that effect). This is not to say that aircrew cannot/do not make good leaders, but that the ability to fly an F35 does not necessarily make you a more capable leader than your peers.
PS Although I have not personally met him I have heard similar comments to RLE's regarding the 3* Engineer.
PS Although I have not personally met him I have heard similar comments to RLE's regarding the 3* Engineer.