Flying Pay
 

I know several people have posted threads concerning flying pay but I don't think people realise just how many this might effect.

NCA who were commissioned in Branch and have had their NCA time served taken into account for progression up the Officers Pay Scales may be in for a shock.

I have recently been approached by PSF looking to reclaim £53k in "over issue". £20k was attributed to the above, whilst the other £33k was when I transferred to Pilot.

The RAF dropped me down to the lower rate of flying pay straight away, without warning, and I'll stay there until the case is resolved.

Is there anyone else in a similar situation or has taken the matter further, ie redress, Gilbert Blades or MPs?

Bl**by 'ell mattdog!

That is some over-issue. I have heard something before about the fact that you can not 'reasonably' be expected to pay that sort of amount back. I also assume you were not aware of the fact that you were being overpaid. It sounds like this needs a letter to AMP! Good luck mate.

Bootflap

If you look in the AP3392 under flying pay, it clearly states that:

b. NCA Commissioned as Pilot or WSO

(1). With effect from 1 Apr 03, NCA who began IOT on or before 31 Mar 03, will continue to receive their NCA rate of FP during IOT. On commissioning and during Pilot or WSO training, they will continue to receive their NCA rate of FP until such time as they have completed a 72 week QP, or are suspended from such training. They will then transfer to the Initial Rate of FP for officers and will remain at this rate for 4 years. However, time spent in receipt of NCA rates of FP is to be counted towards progression up the officer rates of FP.

(2). With effect from 1 Apr 03, NCA who begin IOT on or after 1 Apr 03 will continue to receive their NCA rate of FP during IOT. On commissioning and during Pilot or WSO training, they will continue to receive their NCA rate of FP until such time as they successfully complete Operational Conversion Unit (OCU) training or are suspended from training. Following successful completion of OCU training, they will transfer to the Initial Rate of FP for officers and will remain at this rate for 4 years. Time spent in receipt of NCA rates of FP is not counted towards progression up the officer rate of FP.

c. NCA Commissioned in the Same Aircrew Category.

(1). With effect from 1 Apr 03, NCA who began IOT on or before 31 Mar 03 will continue to receive their NCA rate of FP until the date of their commissioning, if commissioned in the same aircrew category. On appointment to commission, they will transfer from NCA rates of FP to equivalent commissioned rates of FP. NCA in receipt of the Initial Rate of NCA FP on commissioning will transfer to the Initial Rate of FP for officers and NCA in receipt of the Middle Rate of NCA FP will transfer to the Middle Rate of FP for officers. Time spent in receipt of NCA rates of FP is to be counted towards progression up the officer rates of FP.

(2). With effect from 1 Apr 03, NCA who began IOT on or after 1 Apr 03 will continue to receive their NCA rate of FP until the date of their commissioning, if commissioned in the same aircrew category. On appointment to commission, they will transfer from NCA rates of FP to the equivalent commissioned rates of FP. NCA in receipt of the Initial Rate of NCA FP on commissioning will transfer to the Initial Rate of FP for officers and NCA in receipt of the Middle Rate of NCA FP will transfer to the Middle Rate of FP of FP for officers. Following transfer to the officer rates of FP, they will remain at either the Initial or Middle Rate, as appropriate, for 4 years. Time spent in receipt of NCA rates of FP is not counted towards progression up the officers rates of FP.

How on earth did you manage to get Over paid to the tune of £53k without noticing something was wrong????

mattdog, check your PMs

Thanks for the replies, AP3392 is how I'm trying to fight it at the moment but I have to try and get hold of the versions that were extant at that time ie 1997 and 2000. The version qouted there was written 2003 unfortunately otherwise it would be clear cut.

I didn't notice the supposed over issue because it was a common sense pay increase, I'd done 8 years as NCA therefore went on to the middle rate of Officers flying pay, they think I should have started again. And the same when I transferred to pilot 3 years later.

Haven't heard of PMs before??

mattdog,

I have sent you a private massage with some information.

Matt,
hit the user cp icon at the top of the page to check for personal messages.....:ok: (I sound like an expert but only found it the other day which is why I haven't replied to JP and the like)! I would question them dipping your flying pay at the mo by the way; 'specially if you've got a mortgage riding on the strength of it. See ya soon buddy, and I'm sure things will come good.

Laters
Dave

Mattdog,

I'm sure under FOI that the back copies will be available.
If you have snags PM me as some of the RN guys had snags with changes to flying pay during training back in the early 90's and they won with the threat of court action.

Basically there is a law (its old but a good un) that states if you were genuinely paid , ie you didn't have any concerns that you were being overpaid because you believed you were entitled to it and then spent the money in good faith - tough MOD, their checks and balances should be more robust and the responsibility lies with the administrator!

Additionally thay are not entitled to 'dock' the money from your pay until a case has been proven against you or you agree for it to happen.

Good luck - take 'em down with you!

Mattdog
I was commissioned as a pilot in 1990 after having served 6 years as NCA. My flying pay was kept at the NCA rate until I was re-winged as a pilot when it then went onto the officers' rate with the NCA time fully credited. My oppo who was commissioned in branch had his flying pay put onto the officers' rate on the day he was commisioned, again with full credit for his NCA time. I know of many others who were paid in the same way.
One anomaly of this system was that if I had been chopped as a pilot I would have had an instant increase in flying pay as I would have become commissioned in my old branch!!!

Cheers Dave, unfortunately they've taken me good stlye on QR8 which states that whilst a dispute over flying pay is reconciled they can pretty much do what they want...... I can see lawyers getting involved though as I wasn't given any warning of the approaching poverty!

Max, sounds like you're fairly similar in the route you took. I'd keep a low profile if I was you or the Stazi Adminers might hunt you down, I'll keep posting updates.

Flying Pay
 

I was overpaid flying pay by about £600, and I assumed I would have to pay it back. However, someone in SHQ new of a 'letter' in which the RAF legal people said that in any court case the RAF would lose, and that the matter would be quietly 'dropped'

FL575

Thanks for that, I've taken legal advice and they say pretty much the same thing, the biggest fight will be trying to get put back on to the level of flying pay I was on before this all happened!

Thanks Mattdog

I will be keeping my head down on this one and would appreciate knowing what your final outcome is.

How you asked your P staffs just how many people they think that this might apply to across the RAF? I think it will probably run into the hundreds.

The other thing that you may have on your side is that this will also apply to quite a few senior officers (who were commissioned from NCA). Including a couple of Wg Cdr's presently serving at PMA and at least one Gp Capt.

I am also fairly sure that the flying pay we received on commissioning WAS correct in accordance with the AP on issue at the time.

Max

Dont blame you there at all, watch this space for updates.

I'm sure as well about the flying pay at the time and the current 3392 confirms that as well, I can't see the new version being LESS restrictive.

Apparantly the investigation is looking at about 150 people with a ruling coming out next week.

MD,

The issue effects around 170 people in the entire RAF around a dozen are at the secret RAF Base near Swindon. The DLS and PMA staffs are reviewing every persons record who may be involved and as you say are to issue individuals with "letters" by the end of next week.

I believe this entire problem has been highlighted to the PMA by a problem at ISK. They will not issue the letters until they have resolved the problem at ISK. It is my understanding that this problem was highlighted in the PMA some years ago and it was ruled on then. A change of post holder and the policy gets reviewed as it is costimg money. Another REMF gets promoted after F****ing some Aircrew.

I am aslo involved in this debarkle awaiting my "bill" next week. Please spread the word as ALL NCA who commissioned into aircrew branches will be effected. This uproar that this may cause may make it go away.

Matt as you changed branch whilst commissioned does this also apply to Navs who become Pilots, if not then you have a good case based on parity of treatment.

MAX, methinks in this case think trying to keep low is not an option.

Bring it on!

mattdog cx pm's

For those of us ex-NCA not currently at home to receive this 'letter', any detail on what exactly PMA's problem is? Is it that no NCA flying time should ever have counted towards O's flying pay, or that it doesn't count if you went Pilot or Nav instead of AEO/Eng Ldr/Loadie Ldr ? As Mattdog says, an old copy of the AP3392 in force at the time would surely back us up - anyone got a copy??

Might be worth a visit to pubs and forms store [or whatever it is called these days]. You may find old copies of the AP gathering dust in a box in the corner [did that myself a few years ago]...

As far as I'm aware, this is going to affect ALL NCA who were commissioned into any flying branch where their time served recieving NCA flying pay counted towards any increments in their officer flying pay scale, no matter the branch!

As far as back copies, all stores were told to return or destroy old pubs but I'm sure I'm going to be able to get hold of one, they must be basing their argument on a copy otherwise the case wouldn't stand.