Reported Pause in RAF White Recruiting To Meet Diversity Targets
You are absolutely correct. Targeted advertising and recruitment is not a bad thing. Every human from any socio-economic group of any gender/race/sexuality should understand that they are welcome to join the RAF and the wider armed forces. That is correct and fair.
Beyond that though the numbers should be irrelevant. You can’t make people join the RAF (I think the Navy used to do exactly this though as recently as 200 years ago) and you really shouldn’t turn anyone away based on any protected characteristic.
Fair treatment and equality of opportunity should be sacrosanct. For all humans who wish to join the RAF.
I’m afraid I can’t be convinced otherwise. Please notice how I have chosen my language before you try.
BV
Beyond that though the numbers should be irrelevant. You can’t make people join the RAF (I think the Navy used to do exactly this though as recently as 200 years ago) and you really shouldn’t turn anyone away based on any protected characteristic.
Fair treatment and equality of opportunity should be sacrosanct. For all humans who wish to join the RAF.
I’m afraid I can’t be convinced otherwise. Please notice how I have chosen my language before you try.
BV
If you are reflecting society, then the percentages of some groups are very small. You also have to allow for the fact that many of these small groups do not want to enlist.
Do you stop recruiting in order to fill these slots, even though they will probably never fill the slot with the desired group?
Seeking the best from whatever group they come from is surely the best policy.
Do you stop recruiting in order to fill these slots, even though they will probably never fill the slot with the desired group?
Seeking the best from whatever group they come from is surely the best policy.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,915
Received 2,839 Likes
on
1,212 Posts
With many of these stories that we see in the media I usually take them with a pinch of salt. I also usually give the VSOs the benefit of the doubt and accept that I do not necessarily understand the strategic levels of thinking behind such initiatives.
On this particular issue though I feel they have completely lost the plot. Just read some of the bio’s of the senior leadership team at the link above. Their D and I statements seem to be given far more thought than a grand military strategy for a major offensive. I bet the commander of British land forces for the Falklands invasion put less thought into his statement of intent than some of those VSOs have put into their statements about their views on D and I.
BV
On this particular issue though I feel they have completely lost the plot. Just read some of the bio’s of the senior leadership team at the link above. Their D and I statements seem to be given far more thought than a grand military strategy for a major offensive. I bet the commander of British land forces for the Falklands invasion put less thought into his statement of intent than some of those VSOs have put into their statements about their views on D and I.
BV
Here is one I couldn't fathom Bob, What the heck has dentistry to do with the RAES or am I missing something?
Chief of Staff Personnel and Air Secretary | Royal Air Force (mod.uk)
She joined the Royal Air Force in 1991, following graduation from Kings College London with a Bachelor in Dental Surgery and for the first half of her career looked after her patients in dental centres and military hospitals across the globe. She was appointed Queen’s Honorary Dental Surgeon in December 2016.
Air Vice-Marshal Byford is the RAF’s Deputy Diversity and Inclusion Champion and is passionate about fair, transparent and inclusive treatment of the Whole Force. She is very proud to be Honorary President for Staffordshire Wing RAF Air Cadets, andAir Vice-Marshal Byford is the RAF’s Deputy Diversity and Inclusion Champion and is passionate about fair, transparent and inclusive treatment of the Whole Force. She is very proud to be Honorary President for Staffordshire Wing RAF Air Cadets, and in January 2020 she received the President’s invitation to become a Fellow of the Royal Aeronautical Society.
As the world’s only professional body dedicated to the aerospace community, we exist to further the advancement of aeronautical art, science and engineering around the world.
Established in 1866, the Society has been at the forefront of developments in aerospace, seeking to promote the highest professional standards and provide a central forum for sharing knowledge.
Established in 1866, the Society has been at the forefront of developments in aerospace, seeking to promote the highest professional standards and provide a central forum for sharing knowledge.
The RAeS is a licensed body of the Engineering Council.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,915
Received 2,839 Likes
on
1,212 Posts
If they didn't make such a big play about the percentages of ethnic minorities , women, religions etc in the Forces no one would be any the wiser and everyone would get on a lot better, instead of trying to reach the impossible and failing to even meet the required numbers..
I suppose you could apply to join as a member of the Jedi religion and as they haven't i presume got someone of the Jedi religion they would be required to look at you as a prospective applicant to satisfy their diversity requirements, no matter how little skills you had with a light sabre.
I suppose you could apply to join as a member of the Jedi religion and as they haven't i presume got someone of the Jedi religion they would be required to look at you as a prospective applicant to satisfy their diversity requirements, no matter how little skills you had with a light sabre.
It goes without saying that if you positively discriminate in your recruitment in favour of one group, you are negatively discriminating against another by denying them a fair opportunity. That is illegal. Selection by merit is the only legal way of recruiting.
O/C SHQ “We have been sent a directive from on high to check that we have enough SNCO Buffoons. Do we meet the Quota?”
ADJ “We are one short but Corporal Morton meets the Qualifications. Shall we promote him?”
O/C SHQ “Yes, that’ll do it.”
ADJ “What will be the authorising reference for his promotion sir?”
O/C SHQ “Hmm, we obviously cannot use Buffoon. I think Qolqot would be a good solution.”
ADJ “Qolqot Sir?”
O/C SHQ “Yes, Qolqot. Short for Qualified or Quota. We can use it again for all the sex / age / colour / disability quotas they throw at us in the future. And nobody will have any idea what it means
ADJ “Very good, Sir.”
ADJ “We are one short but Corporal Morton meets the Qualifications. Shall we promote him?”
O/C SHQ “Yes, that’ll do it.”
ADJ “What will be the authorising reference for his promotion sir?”
O/C SHQ “Hmm, we obviously cannot use Buffoon. I think Qolqot would be a good solution.”
ADJ “Qolqot Sir?”
O/C SHQ “Yes, Qolqot. Short for Qualified or Quota. We can use it again for all the sex / age / colour / disability quotas they throw at us in the future. And nobody will have any idea what it means
ADJ “Very good, Sir.”
One factor which I know has been raised as an issue internally, and which has been resolutely ignored, is that members of some ethnic groups are much less likely than others to volunteer for military service. Not because the services are unwelcoming or discriminatory, but because of cultural preferences or entrenched political views. Examples would be the British Indian and Chinese communities, in which educational attainment levels are far higher than the national average and in which military service is viewed as a low status career, and the British Muslim community, which understandably sees campaigns of the past 20 years in a slightly different light to others.
These are generalisations, to be sure, but then it is a generalisation to read across the proportions of ethnic groups from the wider population and set them as recruitment targets without any kind of deeper analysis.
Moreover, there is precisely nothing that the forces can or should do to address these matters. It is not the forces' job to shape the political and cultural views of UK citizens. Any more than, say, it would be the job of the Israeli armed forces to persuade orthodox Jews to serve (which they famously don't, despite their electoral clout driving much of Israeli government policy). Any such initiative should be for elected politicians to lead as part of wider societal reform, encompassing policies across a range of government departments. It should certainly not be driven by a small band of military officers and civil servants, cheered on by interested NGOs and Twitter followers.
Using the military to shape the views and preferences of domestic society is something rightly associated with fascism and dictatorship. Not for me, thank you.
These are generalisations, to be sure, but then it is a generalisation to read across the proportions of ethnic groups from the wider population and set them as recruitment targets without any kind of deeper analysis.
Moreover, there is precisely nothing that the forces can or should do to address these matters. It is not the forces' job to shape the political and cultural views of UK citizens. Any more than, say, it would be the job of the Israeli armed forces to persuade orthodox Jews to serve (which they famously don't, despite their electoral clout driving much of Israeli government policy). Any such initiative should be for elected politicians to lead as part of wider societal reform, encompassing policies across a range of government departments. It should certainly not be driven by a small band of military officers and civil servants, cheered on by interested NGOs and Twitter followers.
Using the military to shape the views and preferences of domestic society is something rightly associated with fascism and dictatorship. Not for me, thank you.
Last edited by Easy Street; 17th Aug 2022 at 12:07.
People will always argue against change - some of us are old enough to remember when women were first allowed to become pilots in the RAF and the complete misogynistic hoop that was spouted in response. None of the early candidates, and none of the many since, were treated differently from their male counterparts when it came to aptitude, medical standards and OQ assessments. The same standards applied to all, regardless of their biology. I don't believe anyone is advocating or accepting a reduction in standards just to meet diversity goals.
There is plenty of evidence for diverse teams performing to a higher standard than homogenous ones. At the individual level, talents do not recognise ethnic or biological boundaries so by putting artificial restrictions in means you limit your pool of talent. Recruiting and selection starts with attraction - ie you have to want to join the organisation or do the job in the first place. If the organisation does not give some nod towards reflecting society, someone looking at becoming a member of it may well think twice or not even bother to apply.
For some groups, as Easy Street points out, the family 'gatekeepers' also have a role to play. I have a friend from UAS days who had secured a slot as a pilot. He was of Indian heritage and, whilst his mother was comfortable with the idea of him joining the RAF, his father was not - he did not see it as a proper career for his son, saying that there weren't 'people like him' in the Service. My friend eventually decided to honour his father's wishes, went off to become a chemist instead, and has regretted it every day since.
It is true that 86% of the UK population is white (2011 census), though it may have come down a point or two since then. Of that 86%, half are female. If your initial expressions of interest from potential recruits do not comprise 43% white females, then there is a question to be asked about public perceptions of the Service (which is why you see 'rainbow' photographs). If you are from a so-called under-represented group, there needs to be some confidence that you will not be discriminated against, or you are likely to look elsewhere.
And to repeat, discriminating against someone on grounds of ethnic origin, sex or other protected characteristics as part of your recruitment process is illegal. Preferring to select someone on those grounds to improve diversity is legal only if the candidates are equal in all other respects.
I agree with the second part of this statement but not the first. There are things that can and should be done, but that needs to be limited to demonstrating that military careers are worthwhile and that the organisational culture is inclusive.
There is plenty of evidence for diverse teams performing to a higher standard than homogenous ones. At the individual level, talents do not recognise ethnic or biological boundaries so by putting artificial restrictions in means you limit your pool of talent. Recruiting and selection starts with attraction - ie you have to want to join the organisation or do the job in the first place. If the organisation does not give some nod towards reflecting society, someone looking at becoming a member of it may well think twice or not even bother to apply.
For some groups, as Easy Street points out, the family 'gatekeepers' also have a role to play. I have a friend from UAS days who had secured a slot as a pilot. He was of Indian heritage and, whilst his mother was comfortable with the idea of him joining the RAF, his father was not - he did not see it as a proper career for his son, saying that there weren't 'people like him' in the Service. My friend eventually decided to honour his father's wishes, went off to become a chemist instead, and has regretted it every day since.
It is true that 86% of the UK population is white (2011 census), though it may have come down a point or two since then. Of that 86%, half are female. If your initial expressions of interest from potential recruits do not comprise 43% white females, then there is a question to be asked about public perceptions of the Service (which is why you see 'rainbow' photographs). If you are from a so-called under-represented group, there needs to be some confidence that you will not be discriminated against, or you are likely to look elsewhere.
And to repeat, discriminating against someone on grounds of ethnic origin, sex or other protected characteristics as part of your recruitment process is illegal. Preferring to select someone on those grounds to improve diversity is legal only if the candidates are equal in all other respects.
Moreover, there is precisely nothing that the forces can or should do to address these matters. It is not the forces' job to shape the political and cultural views of UK citizens.
If they didn't make such a big play about the percentages of ethnic minorities , women, religions etc in the Forces no one would be any the wiser and everyone would get on a lot better, instead of trying to reach the impossible and failing to even meet the required numbers..
I suppose you could apply to join as a member of the Jedi religion and as they haven't i presume got someone of the Jedi religion they would be required to look at you as a prospective applicant to satisfy their diversity requirements, no matter how little skills you had with a light sabre.
I suppose you could apply to join as a member of the Jedi religion and as they haven't i presume got someone of the Jedi religion they would be required to look at you as a prospective applicant to satisfy their diversity requirements, no matter how little skills you had with a light sabre.
Calm down all. Apparently this all perfectly legal, this is not positive discrimination, this is positive action (or at least that’s what a Gp Capt briefed us about 15 months ago). The first is illegal, the second is legal. It’s how the RAF met it’s diversity recruiting targets within the first few months of last year’s recruiting year.
From the News it sounds like the RAF Head of Recruiting (if I understood that correctly) has protested am alleged RAF policy of stopping the recruitment of White Males in an effort to boost Minority recruitment......did I get that right?
If that is correct....I understand why that individual might have some legitimate concerns about the new policy directive.
If the RAF is having an overall shortfall of recruits....and is failing to meet dictated quotas of minorities....exactly how does stopping the recruitment of White Males help the situation beyond boosting the percentage of Minorities over Non-Minorities (White Males)?
The RAF remains understaffed but the Minorities percentages look better while the White Male Category remains static.
Am I in the Twilight Zone or just not understanding what I have read?
Surely I have misread something as no one could be in charge of a military service and come up with such a scheme as that.
If this was the US Army we were talking about....I could believe it but the RAF?
If that is correct....I understand why that individual might have some legitimate concerns about the new policy directive.
If the RAF is having an overall shortfall of recruits....and is failing to meet dictated quotas of minorities....exactly how does stopping the recruitment of White Males help the situation beyond boosting the percentage of Minorities over Non-Minorities (White Males)?
The RAF remains understaffed but the Minorities percentages look better while the White Male Category remains static.
Am I in the Twilight Zone or just not understanding what I have read?
Surely I have misread something as no one could be in charge of a military service and come up with such a scheme as that.
If this was the US Army we were talking about....I could believe it but the RAF?
During my time as a UAS instructor, one of my secondary duties was to arrange attendance at Freshers' Fairs to recruit new members. This went quite well when existing students volunteered to help out, as potential recruits were more likely to chat with them than with 'RAF suits'.
When the pile of application forms came back for initial sifting, I found that a number of applications from people-formerly-known-as-females had been put aside by the Adjutant. "Why is this?", I asked him. "We've got our 10% quota", he replied. I told him that there was no such thing as everyone was equally entitled to be reviewed. At least 2 of those who'd been put aside were ultimately successful - and a third would have been except that, try as we might, we couldn't locate her. We later received rather an aggrieved letter from her parents, to which I apologised and said that we'd be very happy to see her for the next year's intake. She duly turned up, did very well at interview but unfortunately failed medical assessment.
Quotas are an abomination!
When the pile of application forms came back for initial sifting, I found that a number of applications from people-formerly-known-as-females had been put aside by the Adjutant. "Why is this?", I asked him. "We've got our 10% quota", he replied. I told him that there was no such thing as everyone was equally entitled to be reviewed. At least 2 of those who'd been put aside were ultimately successful - and a third would have been except that, try as we might, we couldn't locate her. We later received rather an aggrieved letter from her parents, to which I apologised and said that we'd be very happy to see her for the next year's intake. She duly turned up, did very well at interview but unfortunately failed medical assessment.
Quotas are an abomination!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,915
Received 2,839 Likes
on
1,212 Posts
SASLess
The RAF remains understaffed but the Minorities percentages look better while the White Male Category remains static.
The RAF remains understaffed but the Minorities percentages look better while the White Male Category remains static.