Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

‘Stop choosing useless white male pilots’, RAF told

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

‘Stop choosing useless white male pilots’, RAF told

Old 15th Jun 2023, 11:34
  #261 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK
Age: 67
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Guy Gibson - Application 2022

Dear Mr Gibson,

Thank you for attending OASC for aircrew selection. Sadly I have to inform you that you did not meet the criteria we are looking for we already have enough white male pilots, despite scoring exceedingly well in all areas and with what we deemed to be potentially exceptional leadership qualities. I wish you well in whatever career path you choose and that you can enjoy a spot of schadenfreude over the coming years as those who did less well in selection struggle to master the complexities and challenges of flying training.

Yours sincerely

Dai Vercity
Gp Capt
OASC
Matt Skrossa is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 15th Jun 2023, 15:47
  #262 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Den Haag
Age: 57
Posts: 6,138
Received 277 Likes on 157 Posts
Originally Posted by John Eacott
And yet, once upon a time...all those Useless White Male Pilots, and Others


Still have my copy!
212man is offline  
Old 15th Jun 2023, 22:23
  #263 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,248
Received 451 Likes on 179 Posts
The guy painting the yellow and black lines was useless for sure....he was one tire off center.
SASless is offline  
The following 2 users liked this post by SASless:
Old 15th Jun 2023, 22:40
  #264 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Warrington, UK
Posts: 3,826
Received 66 Likes on 24 Posts
Originally Posted by megan
From the bookshelf John, 30 years earlier, 1940.




Xmas 1954 present.
I also have one of those.
MightyGem is offline  
Old 16th Jun 2023, 05:04
  #265 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 3,219
Received 144 Likes on 60 Posts
Originally Posted by SASless
The guy painting the yellow and black lines was useless for sure....he was one tire off center.
I recall the nose wheel steering mod (692?). The first batch of 4-core turned up with the cores the same colour. I'm sure there were some crossed wires....
tucumseh is offline  
Old 26th Jun 2023, 09:25
  #266 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Somewhere very sunny !
Age: 53
Posts: 338
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
It's not just the RAF but Qantas. My daughter friend passed as the DUX of the class but missed a position in Qantas because a female and an Indian got there places despite the other 2 failing the SIM aptitude test and he passed
Impress to inflate is offline  
Old 26th Jun 2023, 17:19
  #267 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2023
Location: London
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 37 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Impress to inflate
It's not just the RAF but Qantas. My daughter friend passed as the DUX of the class but missed a position in Qantas because a female and an Indian got there places despite the other 2 failing the SIM aptitude test and he passed
I hate starting statements with speaking as but when the hat fits.

Speaking as both a female and a British Indian, the situation you describe is completely crazy and makes me about as angry as it is possible for a person to be. This sort of thing is almost always done by completely insane people who are not part of the target demographic but who want to seem like they are doing the right thing. To be clear this is NOT doing the right thing.
TheOneWhoNeverWas is offline  
The following 12 users liked this post by TheOneWhoNeverWas:
Old 29th Jun 2023, 18:05
  #268 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Nevada, USA
Posts: 1,589
Received 32 Likes on 21 Posts
Chief of the Air Staff Statement on RAF Recruiting Inquiry | Royal Air Force (mod.uk)

raf.mod.uk/documents/pdf/RAF-Recruiting-and-Selection-Non-Statutory-Inquiry-Report/
RAFEngO74to09 is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2023, 18:07
  #269 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: The Alps
Posts: 3,115
Received 80 Likes on 46 Posts
Report release on recruiting inquiry

Sir Rich Knighton issues statement.

https://www.raf.mod.uk/news/articles...iting-inquiry/



chopper2004 is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2023, 18:36
  #270 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: W. Scotland
Posts: 647
Received 41 Likes on 22 Posts
What's happening to the Gp Capt whose resigned? Reinstated? Full compo?
What's happening to those who caused this? And those who stood back and allowed it?

Didn't think so. Shower of sh*ts.
dervish is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2023, 19:08
  #271 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The Roman Empire
Posts: 2,424
Received 57 Likes on 25 Posts
Ah, but lessons have been "identified"!
Biggus is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2023, 19:35
  #272 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: RWB
Age: 57
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 5 Posts
Anyone got contact details for Wigston? I’d like to tell what a complete see u next Tuesday he is and the untold damage he has done to the RAF.
Clunk60 is offline  
The following 2 users liked this post by Clunk60:
Old 29th Jun 2023, 20:47
  #273 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Lincoln
Age: 71
Posts: 480
Received 5 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by dervish
What's happening to the Gp Capt whose resigned? Reinstated? Full compo?
What's happening to those who caused this? And those who stood back and allowed it?

Didn't think so. Shower of sh*ts.
Daily Mail piece:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...criminate.html
Exrigger is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 29th Jun 2023, 22:11
  #274 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Their Target for Tonight
Posts: 579
Received 6 Likes on 2 Posts
Para 5.84 of the report:

in an email to COS Pers on 8 August 2022, DLS set out the principles to be applied dependent on whether or not there were criteria by which to distinguish candidates, and concluded that "If the executive ask R&S to do this it would constitute in my view a lawful order —there is a recent case from the Courts-Martial appeal court which states that even where there is a risk civil law may be broken (and this is by no means certain here) it does not stop the activity being lawful for the purposes of an order — the legal and reputational risk is borne by the RAF and CAS —not the individuals in R&S"

This is an amazing statement - effectively the Nurenberg defence! “We vere just followink orders!”
Red Line Entry is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2023, 22:19
  #275 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Nevada, USA
Posts: 1,589
Received 32 Likes on 21 Posts
"One of the "bending out of shape" options discussed at that meeting was whether to create an additional 196 Personnel Operations (Pers Ops) posts in the Service above the ITR, in part because these roles were historically attractive to both female and EM candidates". It was made clear by ACOS WRR that the total cost of this would be around £11M and gaps would be created elsewhere on the front line"

WTF!

Last edited by RAFEngO74to09; 29th Jun 2023 at 23:26.
RAFEngO74to09 is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 29th Jun 2023, 22:33
  #276 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Nevada, USA
Posts: 1,589
Received 32 Likes on 21 Posts
"R&S were told that the achievement of the EM and female ratios were the Chief of the Air Staff's (CAS) highest priority after operations" - so not fixing flying training which had been directed as #1 then.

Last edited by RAFEngO74to09; 29th Jun 2023 at 23:02.
RAFEngO74to09 is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2023, 23:59
  #277 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Great Britain
Age: 51
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 5 Posts
This from the Non-Statutory Investigation (NSI):



Finding the names of those that Tobias Ellwood has said, should be held to account is fairly simple:

Tobias Ellwood, the chair of the defence select committee, said he and his colleagues would be considering whether to ask the previous chief of the air staff to correct the record after he previously denied any unlawful discrimination had taken place."I do hope that Mike Wigston, now conveniently retired, recognises how perhaps he misled parliament in coming in front of our committee and should now take this opportunity to correct the record," Mr Ellwood said.

"Discrimination was taking place and that was illegal."

He also said those responsible for the unlawful activity should be held to account.
They are listed here: https://www.raf.mod.uk/our-organisat...-appointments/

I’ve saved the effort here:







Some of their names and email addresses appear in this FOI request, that also seems to show them carrying out these despicable and illegal orders and directions: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reque..._passthrough=1

Surely, Wigston should be told to go back and set the record straight as he would have appeared to have misled the House of Commons Defence Committee - he shouldn’t be allowed to hide in retirement. The 3-star DCom Cap at the time appears to be AM Turner who was suspended and what looked like being forced to resign for some alleged ‘naked gardening’, ‘naturist dog ball throwing’ and ‘showing his neighbour where he could park his bike’: https://www.witneygazette.co.uk/news...rs-spot-naked/ . This NSI revelation appears to be a further black mark on his record. But according to the Senior Appointments list COS Pers is still in post, as is ACOS WRR. At the very least, they should no longer be in post as of today and moved to other roles - or given a ‘blue letter’ as 1-star and above are given if their is no next posting.

Whilst it is really pleasing to see Sir Rich Knighton taking the NSI criticism for the Service squarely on the chin. I would expect no less from him. There is no bluff and bluster that we had grown to expect with his predecessor. However, the job is unfinished whilst the 4 named in the NSI as having made the direction to Gp Capt Nicholl have not been held to account. That must surely happen.

CPL Clott

Corporal Clott is offline  
The following 5 users liked this post by Corporal Clott:
Old 30th Jun 2023, 08:09
  #278 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The Roman Empire
Posts: 2,424
Received 57 Likes on 25 Posts
The NSI is not a police enquiry or court of law. Nevertheless, the RAF has admitted it conducted an illegal act.

Saying things like, it wasn't intentional, it wasn't appreciated it was illegal is irrelevant. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

So who is to be held accountable for a breach of law? Does the RAF expect to get away with "we're sorry and it won't happen again", while the instigators of this action slip quietly away with their reputations and pensions intact?
Biggus is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2023, 08:34
  #279 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2022
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 19
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
To my mind this whole thing has done huge damage to the organisation, morale and image of the Royal Air Force. Here is hoping Sir Richard Knighton can start to put things right,
Woodsy2417 is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2023, 09:27
  #280 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: London
Age: 67
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 35 Likes on 12 Posts
Originally Posted by Red Line Entry
Para 5.84 of the report:

in an email to COS Pers on 8 August 2022, DLS set out the principles to be applied dependent on whether or not there were criteria by which to distinguish candidates, and concluded that "If the executive ask R&S to do this it would constitute in my view a lawful order —there is a recent case from the Courts-Martial appeal court which states that even where there is a risk civil law may be broken (and this is by no means certain here) it does not stop the activity being lawful for the purposes of an order — the legal and reputational risk is borne by the RAF and CAS —not the individuals in R&S"

This is an amazing statement - effectively the Nurenberg defence! “We vere just followink orders!”
It is indeed an amazing statement and it would be interesting to see if that C-M appeal judgement would hold up in the High Court. I suspect not. The decision on a Judicial Review into the a coroner's decision to fine the Chief Inspector AAIB for refusing to disclose CVR evidence from a fatal accident (Secretary of State for Transport v Senior Coroner for Norfolk [2016] EWHC 2279) hinged on the coroner having no lawful power to order CI AAIB to disclose information that was protected by the Annex 13 Treaty obligations that were in force under (then) EU law. In other words, you can't order someone to breach a legal obligation

If you take that into the ROE sphere, as Red Line Entry notes, ordering someone to use force outwith the ROE profile would not be described as 'lawful for the purposes of giving an order'. If you comply with that order, knowing it to be unlawful, your act is itself unlawful. When Sgt Fool orders Cpl Knuckles to take Gunner Smith behind the hangar and give him some percussive counselling which then occurs, both commit an offence. Etc.

It is worth noting that the DLS email came around the time that the good Gp Capt had pulled the handle; could you construe this as an attempt to justify the advice her own team had given previously, or is it just marking one's own homework?
Fortissimo is offline  
The following users liked this post:

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.