Discrimination and Prejudice alive and well in the RAF
I once upset the pilots in the crew room by stating the obvious truth that the RAF was the only service that sent their officers off to fight and die for their country, while the ground staff went down the pub and drank all the beer.
Possibly not quite the case if Ivan had started chucking sunshine at us, of course.
Possibly not quite the case if Ivan had started chucking sunshine at us, of course.
As one of the very few serving members on here (35 years and counting), my opinion on this is the following.
1. I’m not outraged or disgusted as some of the posters. I will though, be having interesting discussions right up my CoC about how the message in this email directly contradicts the mandatory D&I training that we currently do.
2. The RAF is trying to be and recruit more diverse people. This is nothing to do with quotas, but is about ensuring that we get to choose the best people from as wide a sphere as possible.
3. Having been involved in phase 1 training, is is clear that, while we are becoming more diverse, there still exists a disparity in who we recruit from as opposed to who we would like to recruit from. Again, this is to ensure that we have a wider pool from which to choose the best.
4. There are no shortcuts or lessening of standards. If one is good enough to be selected as a FJ pilot, regardless of anything,and subsequently passes the rigorous training, then they are good enough.
5. Everyone should do their research before attending OASC. If they did, they would quickly find out the sex, colour and branch of every CAS. Is that enough to turn away prospective recruits because of a perceived lack of diversity? If it is, then we are choosing the best from a smaller pool.
6. I don’t care about colour, sex, sexuality or any other factor, I only care about whether that person can do the job they were selected to do. When I joined, sexism, racism and homophobia was rife. Thankfully the armed forces are currently in a much better place.
7. For those that say we are not getting our priorities straight, it’s not binary. We can be diverse and war fight. Look at those relatively younger people currently serving, with their chests full of campaign medals, and tell me we are too “woke”.
1. I’m not outraged or disgusted as some of the posters. I will though, be having interesting discussions right up my CoC about how the message in this email directly contradicts the mandatory D&I training that we currently do.
2. The RAF is trying to be and recruit more diverse people. This is nothing to do with quotas, but is about ensuring that we get to choose the best people from as wide a sphere as possible.
3. Having been involved in phase 1 training, is is clear that, while we are becoming more diverse, there still exists a disparity in who we recruit from as opposed to who we would like to recruit from. Again, this is to ensure that we have a wider pool from which to choose the best.
4. There are no shortcuts or lessening of standards. If one is good enough to be selected as a FJ pilot, regardless of anything,and subsequently passes the rigorous training, then they are good enough.
5. Everyone should do their research before attending OASC. If they did, they would quickly find out the sex, colour and branch of every CAS. Is that enough to turn away prospective recruits because of a perceived lack of diversity? If it is, then we are choosing the best from a smaller pool.
6. I don’t care about colour, sex, sexuality or any other factor, I only care about whether that person can do the job they were selected to do. When I joined, sexism, racism and homophobia was rife. Thankfully the armed forces are currently in a much better place.
7. For those that say we are not getting our priorities straight, it’s not binary. We can be diverse and war fight. Look at those relatively younger people currently serving, with their chests full of campaign medals, and tell me we are too “woke”.
Last edited by Toadstool; 7th May 2022 at 09:44.
or the aptitude was designed for 18-21 year old males as the “norm”, a long time ago and haven’t been upgraded…
”best” is generally subjective, and absolutely subject to conservative bias, sunk cost fallacies, and cultural barriers to change.
put it this way, if F-35 were the only basis for selection, the test would be different to selection for GR7/FA2…
”best” is generally subjective, and absolutely subject to conservative bias, sunk cost fallacies, and cultural barriers to change.
put it this way, if F-35 were the only basis for selection, the test would be different to selection for GR7/FA2…
Some uncomfortable truths in that little lot…
Last edited by Corporal Clott; 7th May 2022 at 10:48. Reason: Spelling mistook
Out of curiosity can anyone explain why the RAF has different fitness standards for males and females. Surely now that all jobs are open to both, the required fitness standard should be specified for the particular role in which the person wiill be employed?
Good question but not one that can be answered!
If you started a new thread with your question it would easily outstrip the #108 of this thread with strong views at both ends of the spectrum.
If you started a new thread with your question it would easily outstrip the #108 of this thread with strong views at both ends of the spectrum.
Thread Starter
Completely indefensible.
the RNFT is being replaced with an age and gender (and sex) agnostic test. The problem is that no one really agrees with what being “fit” in the RN should mean.
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Narfalk
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As one of the very few serving members on here (35 years and counting), my opinion on this is the following.
1. I’m not outraged or disgusted as some of the posters. I will though, be having interesting discussions right up my CoC about how the message in this email directly contradicts the mandatory D&I training that we currently do.
2. The RAF is trying to be and recruit more diverse people. This is nothing to do with quotas, but is about ensuring that we get to choose the best people from as wide a sphere as possible.
3. Having been involved in phase 1 training, is is clear that, while we are becoming more diverse, there still exists a disparity in who we recruit from as opposed to who we would like to recruit from. Again, this is to ensure that we have a wider pool from which to choose the best.
4. There are no shortcuts or lessening of standards. If one is good enough to be selected as a FJ pilot, regardless of anything,and subsequently passes the rigorous training, then they are good enough.
5. Everyone should do their research before attending OASC. If they did, they would quickly find out the sex, colour and branch of every CAS. Is that enough to turn away prospective recruits because of a perceived lack of diversity? If it is, then we are choosing the best from a smaller pool.
6. I don’t care about colour, sex, sexuality or any other factor, I only care about whether that person can do the job they were selected to do. When I joined, sexism, racism and homophobia was rife. Thankfully the armed forces are currently in a much better place.
7. For those that say we are not getting our priorities straight, it’s not binary. We can be diverse and war fight. Look at those relatively younger people currently serving, with their chests full of campaign medals, and tell me we are too “woke”.
1. I’m not outraged or disgusted as some of the posters. I will though, be having interesting discussions right up my CoC about how the message in this email directly contradicts the mandatory D&I training that we currently do.
2. The RAF is trying to be and recruit more diverse people. This is nothing to do with quotas, but is about ensuring that we get to choose the best people from as wide a sphere as possible.
3. Having been involved in phase 1 training, is is clear that, while we are becoming more diverse, there still exists a disparity in who we recruit from as opposed to who we would like to recruit from. Again, this is to ensure that we have a wider pool from which to choose the best.
4. There are no shortcuts or lessening of standards. If one is good enough to be selected as a FJ pilot, regardless of anything,and subsequently passes the rigorous training, then they are good enough.
5. Everyone should do their research before attending OASC. If they did, they would quickly find out the sex, colour and branch of every CAS. Is that enough to turn away prospective recruits because of a perceived lack of diversity? If it is, then we are choosing the best from a smaller pool.
6. I don’t care about colour, sex, sexuality or any other factor, I only care about whether that person can do the job they were selected to do. When I joined, sexism, racism and homophobia was rife. Thankfully the armed forces are currently in a much better place.
7. For those that say we are not getting our priorities straight, it’s not binary. We can be diverse and war fight. Look at those relatively younger people currently serving, with their chests full of campaign medals, and tell me we are too “woke”.
I have to agree as well, all this crap is simply detracting from the core goals and values of the RAF, yes there are problems, yes there are faults, but the current war ongoing in Ukraine is showing in no uncertain terms how a modern western force, the RAF included, is so far ahead of the curve in respect of the perceived opposition in both capability and quality that we must be doing something right.
The point of most posts are that "I don't care if they are............ as long as they can do the job". If so the testing, training, and basic requirement's (fitness test) should all be the same. We acknowledge the physical differences between genders, why do we, and I think we are, not acknowledge the psychological differences. One being multi tasking in which the female gender appears to be superior and in an aviation world were hack rack and zoom is taking a second place to systems operation this becomes a core aptitude. RAAF aptitude testing was male bias until a few years ago. Not surprising considering little if any changes in the preceding 40, 50, or even 80 years and not utilised to keep females out just developed as it was a male environment. Quota's have been used to the detriment of standard's. By allowing a lower standard applicant through based on whatever means either changing standards to allow a pass (moving the problem onto the squadron) or nullifying the reason to do so, allowing more role models, in that there are more failures. Don't know the answer.
2. The RAF is trying to be and recruit more diverse people. This is nothing to do with quotas, but is about ensuring that we get to choose the best people from as wide a sphere as possible.
Thread drift, if I may.
The above is interesting.
What is the RAF requirement for selection as aircrew, for example, as far as academic qualifications are concerned? Quite high I would expect. So those who don't make the cut, are weeded out before any aptitude for flying, is considered. This doesn't fit with your comment above.
Dragged up in a poor family I left school at 15, knowing up to 12 x table. I went the self improver route, and was flying professionally at 20. UK ATPL 1978, at 26. I classed myself as an aviator, not a mathematician. I'm not implying I would have made it into the RAF on flying ability. However I would not even qualify to enroll at a ATO now.
Thread drift, if I may.
The above is interesting.
What is the RAF requirement for selection as aircrew, for example, as far as academic qualifications are concerned? Quite high I would expect. So those who don't make the cut, are weeded out before any aptitude for flying, is considered. This doesn't fit with your comment above.
Dragged up in a poor family I left school at 15, knowing up to 12 x table. I went the self improver route, and was flying professionally at 20. UK ATPL 1978, at 26. I classed myself as an aviator, not a mathematician. I'm not implying I would have made it into the RAF on flying ability. However I would not even qualify to enroll at a ATO now.
2. The RAF is trying to be and recruit more diverse people. This is nothing to do with quotas, but is about ensuring that we get to choose the best people from as wide a sphere as possible.
Thread drift, if I may.
The above is interesting.
What is the RAF requirement for selection as aircrew, for example, as far as academic qualifications are concerned? Quite high I would expect. So those who don't make the cut, are weeded out before any aptitude for flying, is considered. This doesn't fit with your comment above.
Dragged up in a poor family I left school at 15, knowing up to 12 x table. I went the self improver route, and was flying professionally at 20. UK ATPL 1978, at 26. I classed myself as an aviator, not a mathematician. I'm not implying I would have made it into the RAF on flying ability. However I would not even qualify to enroll at a ATO now.
Thread drift, if I may.
The above is interesting.
What is the RAF requirement for selection as aircrew, for example, as far as academic qualifications are concerned? Quite high I would expect. So those who don't make the cut, are weeded out before any aptitude for flying, is considered. This doesn't fit with your comment above.
Dragged up in a poor family I left school at 15, knowing up to 12 x table. I went the self improver route, and was flying professionally at 20. UK ATPL 1978, at 26. I classed myself as an aviator, not a mathematician. I'm not implying I would have made it into the RAF on flying ability. However I would not even qualify to enroll at a ATO now.
APPLICANTS MUST:
- Be aged 17.5 – 23 years old (Must enter IOT before 24th birthday)
- Have GCSEs at Grade C/4 or SNE at Grade 5 or SCE Standard Grades at Grade 2/SNE 5 in English and Maths and at least three other subjects. Have at least 2 A2 Levels/3 Highers at Grade C or above (excluding General Studies, Critical Thinking or Citizenship Studies) which must total a minimum of 64 UCAS points
- Be a citizen of the United Kingdom or holder of dual UK/ other nationality
- Commit to minimum 12 years service
- Meet the health and fitness criteria
- Pass a Fitness test - Details below
- Candidates must be able to swim - see details below
Last edited by Toadstool; 8th May 2022 at 13:28.
Regarding fitness, BBC2 at 20:00 tonight 8th May looks interesting:
This is the behind-the-scenes story of one of the most famous military units on earth. The Royal Marine Commandos are globally renowned and nationally revered, and yet widely misunderstood.
With unprecedented access to all ranks, the series uncovers the role of a Commando in the present day through a rarely seen glimpse behind closed doors and the lives of the ‘Corps Family’, men and women who make up this extraordinary organisation, from the highest echelons right through to fresh-faced recruits and the not so fresh, but experienced faces of committed Royal Marine veterans.
Danger and drama are part of the daily routine, with risk and rescues simply part of the job. This is the story of the world’s first responders; from international threats to UK interests, to environmental disasters, Britain’s elite sea-borne raiders, are the proud descendants of 350 years of military excellence.
The series follows both national and international operations. Commandos are a global emergency service - from the Arctic to Anglesey.
With unprecedented access to all ranks, the series uncovers the role of a Commando in the present day through a rarely seen glimpse behind closed doors and the lives of the ‘Corps Family’, men and women who make up this extraordinary organisation, from the highest echelons right through to fresh-faced recruits and the not so fresh, but experienced faces of committed Royal Marine veterans.
Danger and drama are part of the daily routine, with risk and rescues simply part of the job. This is the story of the world’s first responders; from international threats to UK interests, to environmental disasters, Britain’s elite sea-borne raiders, are the proud descendants of 350 years of military excellence.
The series follows both national and international operations. Commandos are a global emergency service - from the Arctic to Anglesey.
I mentioned diversity, not aptitude but, of course the RAF (Officers and Aircrew) expects a certain standard and aptitude to be met before additional selection with CBAT and OASC. This is before they even get to phase one trg.
APPLICANTS MUST:
- Be aged 17.5 – 23 years old (Must enter IOT before 24th birthday)
- Have GCSEs at Grade C/4 or SNE at Grade 5 or SCE Standard Grades at Grade 2/SNE 5 in English and Maths and at least three other subjects. Have at least 2 A2 Levels/3 Highers at Grade C or above (excluding General Studies, Critical Thinking or Citizenship Studies) which must total a minimum of 64 UCAS points
- Be a citizen of the United Kingdom or holder of dual UK/ other nationality
- Commit to minimum 12 years service
- Meet the health and fitness criteria
- Pass a Fitness test - Details below
- Candidates must be able to swim - see details below
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Narfalk
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2. The RAF is trying to be and recruit more diverse people. This is nothing to do with quotas, but is about ensuring that we get to choose the best people from as wide a sphere as possible.
Thread drift, if I may.
The above is interesting.
What is the RAF requirement for selection as aircrew, for example, as far as academic qualifications are concerned? Quite high I would expect. So those who don't make the cut, are weeded out before any aptitude for flying, is considered. This doesn't fit with your comment above.
Dragged up in a poor family I left school at 15, knowing up to 12 x table. I went the self improver route, and was flying professionally at 20. UK ATPL 1978, at 26. I classed myself as an aviator, not a mathematician. I'm not implying I would have made it into the RAF on flying ability. However I would not even qualify to enroll at a ATO now.
Thread drift, if I may.
The above is interesting.
What is the RAF requirement for selection as aircrew, for example, as far as academic qualifications are concerned? Quite high I would expect. So those who don't make the cut, are weeded out before any aptitude for flying, is considered. This doesn't fit with your comment above.
Dragged up in a poor family I left school at 15, knowing up to 12 x table. I went the self improver route, and was flying professionally at 20. UK ATPL 1978, at 26. I classed myself as an aviator, not a mathematician. I'm not implying I would have made it into the RAF on flying ability. However I would not even qualify to enroll at a ATO now.
