SEAC Vacancy Likely
I suspect that the RAF and RN have someone at the Army Command Sergeant Major level is because the army have one. {Well, two actually, as SEAC is army ........ until Nemesis].
Thread Starter
Examples:
HQ AIRCOM WO Sara Catterall MBE RAF (@CSEL_NATOAIRCOM) / Twitter
22 Gp Sarah Cotman (@sarahcotman) / Twitter
By comparison, the USAF system is to groom SNCOs from successful Sqn First Sergeant assignments into Superintendent / Command Chief appointments at ever increasing levels of responsibility and influence: Wing (ie base) > numbered Air Force > Major Command / Theatre > CMSAF.
In my experience, they are much more skilled in both verbal and written communication and taken more notice of.
A prime example is the current CMSAF JoAnne Bass who has an Ops Support background - including "spec ops" and an impressive array of prior appointments:
https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Biograph...joanne-s-bass/
Don't even get me started on the nonsense RAF Group WO jobs or the so-called Senior Enlisted Advisor at HQ AIRCOM - all seem only to have got where they are by carving out a niche role for themselves as "advisors" on stuff like LGBTQ, gender, diversity, inclusion, mental health etc, getting noticed on Twitter to the extent of getting likes by "on message" 1* > 4* - and even getting MBEs for it !
Examples:
HQ AIRCOM WO Sara Catterall MBE RAF (@CSEL_NATOAIRCOM) / Twitter
22 Gp Sarah Cotman (@sarahcotman) / Twitter
By comparison, the USAF system is to groom SNCOs from successful Sqn First Sergeant assignments into Superintendent / Command Chief appointments at ever increasing levels of responsibility and influence: Wing (ie base) > numbered Air Force > Major Command / Theatre > CMSAF.
In my experience, they are much more skilled in both verbal and written communication and taken more notice of.
A prime example is the current CMSAF JoAnne Bass who has an Ops Support background - including "spec ops" and an impressive array of prior appointments:
https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Biograph...joanne-s-bass/
Examples:
HQ AIRCOM WO Sara Catterall MBE RAF (@CSEL_NATOAIRCOM) / Twitter
22 Gp Sarah Cotman (@sarahcotman) / Twitter
By comparison, the USAF system is to groom SNCOs from successful Sqn First Sergeant assignments into Superintendent / Command Chief appointments at ever increasing levels of responsibility and influence: Wing (ie base) > numbered Air Force > Major Command / Theatre > CMSAF.
In my experience, they are much more skilled in both verbal and written communication and taken more notice of.
A prime example is the current CMSAF JoAnne Bass who has an Ops Support background - including "spec ops" and an impressive array of prior appointments:
https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Biograph...joanne-s-bass/
Just before I left they mentioned that Exec WOs going for a commission would have their recent SJARs included with their OJARs for the PSB. It keeps them in check as they know they can't say what the normal teflon WOs would tell the Senior Officer cadre.
They are there to introduce the new 'WO Lite'.
Just before I left they mentioned that Exec WOs going for a commission would have their recent SJARs included with their OJARs for the PSB. It keeps them in check as they know they can't say what the normal teflon WOs would tell the Senior Officer cadre.
Just before I left they mentioned that Exec WOs going for a commission would have their recent SJARs included with their OJARs for the PSB. It keeps them in check as they know they can't say what the normal teflon WOs would tell the Senior Officer cadre.
Gp WOs are a total waste of time. What are they measured by? What do they produce? And how much time is spent looking into their past to ensure they have no skeletons in the cupboard........... A shambles
Totally agree!
In my very happy time as a Met-man on RAF stations Home and Away, the SWO was a highly respected figure. Station Commander's Inspection always included the Staish and the SWO, with big black stick and [snigger not] silver knob.
The SWO at RAF Nicosia was quite magnificent: changed his KD at lunchtime, and was very good at the nitty-gritty support level.
What a Group WO adds to the party escapes me.
Just because the Army copied NATO who copied the US in adding "super-WOs" does not mean that the most intelligent of our three services should emulate them.
In my very happy time as a Met-man on RAF stations Home and Away, the SWO was a highly respected figure. Station Commander's Inspection always included the Staish and the SWO, with big black stick and [snigger not] silver knob.
The SWO at RAF Nicosia was quite magnificent: changed his KD at lunchtime, and was very good at the nitty-gritty support level.
What a Group WO adds to the party escapes me.
Just because the Army copied NATO who copied the US in adding "super-WOs" does not mean that the most intelligent of our three services should emulate them.
Totally agree!
In my very happy time as a Met-man on RAF stations Home and Away, the SWO was a highly respected figure. Station Commander's Inspection always included the Staish and the SWO, with big black stick and [snigger not] silver knob.
The SWO at RAF Nicosia was quite magnificent: changed his KD at lunchtime, and was very good at the nitty-gritty support level.
What a Group WO adds to the party escapes me.
Just because the Army copied NATO who copied the US in adding "super-WOs" does not mean that the most intelligent of our three services should emulate them.
In my very happy time as a Met-man on RAF stations Home and Away, the SWO was a highly respected figure. Station Commander's Inspection always included the Staish and the SWO, with big black stick and [snigger not] silver knob.
The SWO at RAF Nicosia was quite magnificent: changed his KD at lunchtime, and was very good at the nitty-gritty support level.
What a Group WO adds to the party escapes me.
Just because the Army copied NATO who copied the US in adding "super-WOs" does not mean that the most intelligent of our three services should emulate them.
Jack
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tennessee - Smoky Mountains
Age: 55
Posts: 1,602
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Totally agree!
In my very happy time as a Met-man on RAF stations Home and Away, the SWO was a highly respected figure. Station Commander's Inspection always included the Staish and the SWO, with big black stick and [snigger not] silver knob.
The SWO at RAF Nicosia was quite magnificent: changed his KD at lunchtime, and was very good at the nitty-gritty support level.
What a Group WO adds to the party escapes me.
Just because the Army copied NATO who copied the US in adding "super-WOs" does not mean that the most intelligent of our three services should emulate them.
In my very happy time as a Met-man on RAF stations Home and Away, the SWO was a highly respected figure. Station Commander's Inspection always included the Staish and the SWO, with big black stick and [snigger not] silver knob.
The SWO at RAF Nicosia was quite magnificent: changed his KD at lunchtime, and was very good at the nitty-gritty support level.
What a Group WO adds to the party escapes me.
Just because the Army copied NATO who copied the US in adding "super-WOs" does not mean that the most intelligent of our three services should emulate them.
The Army has had “super WOs” since long before aircraft were thought of, thus begetting a third service, let alone NATO, in the form of Conductors. This is in addition to certain appointments of other WOs. The recent fad for non-jobs for WOs I agree is pointless, but all three services and CDS has signed up for them. None of the services are blameless.
For a short period, 1879 to 1881, conductors were the ONLY warrant officers in the army.
Before 1879, but not continuously, the following were warrant officers: hospital mates, master gunners of Coast Brigades, cavalry troop quartermasters and schoolmasters.
From 1881 conductors were in the top status group of the most senior warrant officers, which included master gunner first. Queen's Regs of the period, and KR subsequently, make the point that conductors headed the list because it was alphabetical. Precedence within the top group between individuals was to be decided by date of warrant or appointment.
From 1989, when the RA and the RM appointed Corps WOs, the conductors were on the way down a slippery slope, and subsequent inventions of two even higher levels [Army Command and SEAC] have put the conductors below the salt.
This all gives the badge inventors a chance to produce designs that become progressively uglier, like the incumbents.
Ah! That old Conductor myth.
For a short period, 1879 to 1881, conductors were the ONLY warrant officers in the army.
Before 1879, but not continuously, the following were warrant officers: hospital mates, master gunners of Coast Brigades, cavalry troop quartermasters and schoolmasters.
From 1881 conductors were in the top status group of the most senior warrant officers, which included master gunner first. Queen's Regs of the period, and KR subsequently, make the point that conductors headed the list because it was alphabetical. Precedence within the top group between individuals was to be decided by date of warrant or appointment.
From 1989, when the RA and the RM appointed Corps WOs, the conductors were on the way down a slippery slope, and subsequent inventions of two even higher levels [Army Command and SEAC] have put the conductors below the salt.
This all gives the badge inventors a chance to produce designs that become progressively uglier, like the incumbents.
For a short period, 1879 to 1881, conductors were the ONLY warrant officers in the army.
Before 1879, but not continuously, the following were warrant officers: hospital mates, master gunners of Coast Brigades, cavalry troop quartermasters and schoolmasters.
From 1881 conductors were in the top status group of the most senior warrant officers, which included master gunner first. Queen's Regs of the period, and KR subsequently, make the point that conductors headed the list because it was alphabetical. Precedence within the top group between individuals was to be decided by date of warrant or appointment.
From 1989, when the RA and the RM appointed Corps WOs, the conductors were on the way down a slippery slope, and subsequent inventions of two even higher levels [Army Command and SEAC] have put the conductors below the salt.
This all gives the badge inventors a chance to produce designs that become progressively uglier, like the incumbents.
Irrespective of seniority of conductor, Fleet chief, Master aircrew, RSM, CSM, BSM, GSM etc. the behaviour of the individual who is the subject of this thread is beyond the pale, both for non-commissioned. WO and commissioned service. He abused his position of trust in one of the most deplorable ways possible. Let's not allow the length of one's member drive this thread, but just decry the (ir)responsible actions of the individual who should have commanded the trust and reliance of all military people who depend totally on trustworthy team work..
Nigerian In Law
Irrespective of seniority of conductor, Fleet chief, Master aircrew, RSM, CSM, BSM, GSM etc. the behaviour of the individual who is the subject of this thread is beyond the pale, both for non-commissioned. WO and commissioned service. He abused his position of trust in one of the most deplorable ways possible. Let's not allow the length of one's member drive this thread, but just decry the (ir)responsible actions of the individual who should have commanded the trust and reliance of all military people who depend totally on trustworthy team work..
NEO
According to ARRSE he has fallen on his [pork] sword.
My local LIDL has a shelf-stacker vacancy but not sure if they are desperate.
I wouldn't want him in the same county, either.
I wouldn't want him in the same county, either.