RA:

You need to think a little harder dear... I'm done trying to shuffle your thought process along if you can't be bothered to give it a little shove of your own... :ugh:

Althenick:

There's a tee shirt out there that sums up my feelings for you... It says, (paraphrased):-

So you're a sport parachutist eh?
Until you've stood in the door
In complete Darkness
At eight hundred feet
with one hundred pounds of equipment
Fifty pounds of parachutes
And leaped into the void
You're still a F'ing* Craphat

There... Look... My memory isn't that bad

http://www.hqrafregiment.net/downloa...1032&mode=view

I think that's fair in this case.. .:ok:


* Hope that doesn't offend too many people

Anyway, on the subject of Para Pay (the original subject prior to the willy waving), I don't see why anyone would receive specialist pay if they are not employed on a tour where those skills will be required - this includes aircrew.

For Parachute Regiment personnel and others in units required to train for and be prepared to parachute, I see no problem with their specialist pay continuing even if they are subsequently not required to jump.

For those on "ground tours" however, I fail to see why the pay should continue until they are posted back to their primary role.

P6Driver:

It used to be that you had to complete 8 jumps per year in order to qualify for Parachute Pay but then I think they let that go by the wayside because an NI tour meant they only had 6 months or less to get the 8 jumps in because they couldn't jump in NI. I don't know if they apply any criteria now other than successfully passed P Coy, Pre-Para, CTC or Hereford and then completed 8 jumps at Brize. I suspect they don't since the cost of each jump has probably become all a bit much. Sad, because there are a couple of "skills" in parachuting in large groups at low level with oodles of kit that need practicing regularly.

P6 - the reason "specialist pay" continues for aircrew on a tour where their "aircrew" skills are not required is simple: flying pay for aircrew is a retention measure. Pilots particularly have skills that are useful in the outside world, usually for more renumeration than Jo Flt Lt earns. Thus they get paid flying pay as an incentive to stay.

However, our lords and masters decree that, on occasion, aircrew must fill desk jobs. That does not make their "specialist" skills less marketable in the outside world, so if you want to keep them, you have to continue to pay them, not pee them off by making them take a £10k pay cut.

It's not rocket science when it comes to "retention" pay really... the trick is for other "specialist" pay where the pay is well earned if said person is doing the job. The question is, does it make enough of a difference in retention vs training cost to be worth paying them while they do a "desk" job (eg EOD chaps cost quite a wodge of cash to train, and obviously the job they do day to day is crazy, so well worth specialist pay. If you send them away from that job for a tour, do you really want to risk losing that skill and experience for the sake of 3 or so years worth of saving specialist pay).

When we look at the para reg as a whole though, the argument may be that, if they never "jump" in anger, do we need to pay them extra to keep them in, bearing in mind that 90% of the time they do the same dets as every other infantry regiment.... discuss...

pba target

A quick answer to:

When we look at the para reg as a whole though, the argument may be that, if they never "jump" in anger, do we need to pay them extra to keep them in, bearing in mind that 90% of the time they do the same dets as every other infantry regiment.... discuss...

Is YES.
This is for exactly the same reason that you mention for aircrew, although the pay incentive for paras to leave the Brit army and work for private companies is a much steeper rise than for aircrew in the civvy world.

I suppose some folks will understand the need for pay to specialists, and some won't.

The fact an above poster was paid extra money for lumping a bergen about all day (and I got extra for running...well shuffling slowly lol with a 150 lbs pack) is kind of missing the point. Bergen lumping is not a clever battlefield skill, but the confidence, belief in your ability and fitness its gives you is worth every penny in conflict.

A few quid a day for soldiers who think 'I am going to' rather than 'I'll have a go' is money well spent IMHO.

As per above, the back biting is funny to watch (and I'm joining in too I suppose).
Why do we discuss silly money savings such as flying pay when we should actually be talking of scrapping the entire RAF AD fleet........How long ago did the RAF (in an RAF aircraft!) last shoot down an opponent in combat (don't mention the Jag).

The above is tongue in cheek...But is another capability we pay for, but are not using in combat. Maybe we will now hear from some disgruntled SBS lad who is upset at getting less pay than his SAS mate, despite the SBS requiring you to receive extra training after completing the SAS course.....and then using your specialism daily:}

I know some very bright Para and ex-Para lads. In fact 2 guys from my IOT were Lance Jacks in the Paras. One flies C130Js and the other is now a Typhoon pilot!! They can't all be thick then as some posters would charge!

As an ex- member of the Household Division , Parachutes are not my thing , but , leave their pay alone !!!! , perhaps the MOD should look at how many Generals , Brigadiers that we have , reportderly FOUR TIMES !!!!! more than the US Military !!!!!!!!! :ugh:

It does make one question the intellect of those who make such assertions doesn't it? :hmm:

"Who exactly are our civilian counterparts? I can't think of anyone employed in the civil service that spends as many nights out of bed in uninviting, often hostile environments doing the type of work done by our soldiers, sailors and airmen "

You could start by looking at the thousands of civil servants who willingly deployed to the Balkans, Iraq and Afghanistan. Sure its not operating directly in the 'close with and kill fuzzy wuzzies' that many people think everyone in HERRICK does, but plenty of CS spend more time outside the wire than many of their military counterparts do. (I've deployed as both CS and as reservist).

"(Oh, and the Civil Service grade you quoted as a "Lt RN equivilant" is no such thing. It is merely a mechanism for determining what grade of accomadation you are entitiled to should you have to spend the odd night out of bed!)"

Please don't start this argument again, its soooooooooo dull. Equiv rank exists because the CS was formed with a rank structure back in the 1860s and has kept it ever since. This rank structure ran roughly paralell to the military one as a guide to messing entitlement, signing off powers and authority for a post (e.g. a C1 is expected to be able to sign off and exercise a similar level of authority and responsibility as a deskbound mil SO1, albeit for 50% of the salary...) and also because the military couldnt cope with the concept of EO, HEO, SEO etc and asked us to explain what that meant in military terms...

In the good old days CS were promoted at the same time scale as their mil equivs, so you'd know a C2 (or HEO then) had the same amount of time served and broad professional experience as an SO2. Sadly thats gone by the by now with more rapid promotion opportunities, but the intent is there.

If you find CS claiming that they are mil equivs, then put them politely and firmly back in their box. They are either insecure idiots or retired officers who wear their retired ranks with more than healthy pride, (in which case treat them with contempt) or the most part are usually fairly naive individuals who work in a rank based environment where the military constantly ask them what their equivalent rank is - hence they start to believe it. Just be nice to them, 99% of them don't mean it. Of course winding up serving mil with the 'you've got to be nice to me because I'm the equivalent of a Galactic Space Field Marshall' is always great sport - my friends and I do it with particularly pompous officers to see how long it takes to get a bite :-)

The lady doth protest too much, methinks

Hamlet Act 3, scene 2, 222–230

I bet if you equalized that situation you could easily save the £4M it would take to pay those who truly deserve it... and then they can get the Christmas bonuses they deserve too... Or is that a little too un-PC these days? :E

Airborne Aircrew has got it spot on. Albeit, from experience, jumping at 20k+ plus (in the dark atached to a very large tube) requires equally the same specialist skill.

Please don't blame the toms for a complete lack of strategic bottle on the part of those that supposedly direct them.

I seem to remember that we could go a couple of years without parachuting, in fact some had to be forced into it but; that never affected pay until some bean counter came along. Nor did it mean you might not get called on to utilise that 'specialist' skill at very short notice.

Read my post - I'm NOT a phuquing sport parachutist! some juan-kerr talked me into doing it for charity and like the mugg that I am took up the challenge oh and BTW the c*nt that was strapped to my back weighed more than 50 lb's - a lot more ;)

7 weeks actually but lets not split hairs

No the 5 squid a night subby was enough for living in a portakabin and eating mil scran - seriously - I liked it, loved the people, but always went home broke (5ver was enough to get you hand-carted in the SR/Sergeants mess - BRILLIANT!)

No - The MoD had (and still has) ZERO idea on how to run a project - whatever size it is - It was basically a job - sorry "Appointment" - that was tied up with so much bureaucracy you could not get FA done whilst your "Customer" - that is the poor barstewards in uniform - had to suck on it. Left for that reason and told them so.

... And quite right too - that used to erk me as well - some of these CS pr1cks seemed to think they had some sort of divine right to use someones home as their own, no respect - not even a please or thank you. In Moscow the Mil used to make me feel very welcome - they really didn't have a choice - but I always made sure that I re-payed their hospitality in some small way.

Despite all of this my original post still stands that is

• If you volunteer for specialist training then the clue is in the wording - volunteer.
• If you don't like either don't volunteer or leave

I'm sorry if this sounds a bit harsh but as I've said - if you join the services for money - then your joining for the wrong reason.

... here's my own thoughts - get rid of ALL the allowances and just give everybody Tax free pay - and with the money saved from the admin costs of taxing service personnel - give all of you a pay rise!

althenick:

Funny... That's the only sensible thing I have ever seen you write... I have questioned the logic of taxing people who work for the government since I first worked for them in 1977...

Hopefully then, you got my point. If you didn't then I'll make the following statement. It really doesn't matter how many free-fall jumps you/anyone has/have done from whatever altitude you/anyone has/have done them from - be it a thousand or twenty thousand feet - until you have endured the incessant crap brought down on you that is required by the various services to be allowed to go to No. 1 PTS and have subsequently lobbed yourself out of perfectly serviceable kites at what is really "low-level" separated by only 1/2 a second from the chap you will impact at 120mph under the aircraft if you leave your door at the same time he leaves his, have managed to avoid/steer away from others in your stick and safely lowered your 100+lb container, (so as not to kill your mate with it), and then, with the ten or so seconds remaining in your descent, set yourself up for a landing that you have really very little control over such that when/if you get up you can fight a battle - possibly immediately then you really can't tell those of us that being a sport parachutist is even close. To sit there and tell me that you "jumped" strapped to a jump dummy is preposterous. You didn't jump... He did... You followed because you were tied to him.

I'll give you credit for going up there and not throttling him to remain inside the aircraft. I will retract all credit given for getting into an argument about "Airborne" and insinuating that what you have done was even close to what "Airborne" really is. For that, Shame on you!

AA
I'm not arguing that your job is better/worse/the same as any other in the services. My point is this - YOU VOLUNTEERED. And as such don't merit anymore/less than the poor sod who is in the front line in AFG/Libya/Iraq or wherever the next big adventure is going to be.

Sorry - that's the way I see it, though I will say this, If you make the extra effort in the Armed services, it should be recognized. But not necessarily with money.

And BTW - I thought about throttling said "Buddy" (Some buddy he turned out to be) but being restrained and 180 to him i couldn't get my hands round LOL.

Q - are there many Gay Free Fallers? its just that I felt a small lump in the base of my spine...

I dunno but you should get it looked at - might be nasty... ;)

Shirley the question should be are there any hetero PJI's?

Surely the same argument then should be that everyone gets the same pay, regardless of their job? WTF should a group captain get more than an SAC? Outranking other people and having to be responsible for them etc is surely offset by the generally better standard of living, greater freedom to determine ones own working week, and inner joy at the way even your worst jokes attract an audience response that makes you think you could have Frnakie Boyle on the run.

Frnakie Boyle?

Erm, can we get back to the point please...
 

Whilst the meat-bomb baiting is obviously entertaining, you clowns are missing the essential point of this matter completely.

Specialist pay is rarely a massive incentive to join a particular branch/regiment/ship but is, without doubt, a massive retention measure.

If we take the example of flying pay for pilots, the only spec. pay on which I am qualified to talk, the simple fact is that if flying pay is deleted then pilots will walk. And without pilots we won't have much of an Air Force. Allow me to elaborate.

In a time where I see many of my colleagues been squeezed into desk jobs as their next posting to an aircraft has vanished in the wake of the SDSR cuts, how many of those talented people do you think would stay if it meant a 25% pay cut? Now add into that the blossoming of civilian aircrew recruiting, the subterranean level of morale in all but the Typhoon force, and the reduction in capabilities and bases already announced, and seriously who would stay?

Quite simply the answer is very few, probably none of those squeezed into ground jobs. And then, my pedigree chums, we are fuc£ed. Good job we've got plenty of young, naive and cheap pilot recruits in the training system to take their places...oh no thats right, we sacked half of them, and gave the other half a thoroughly good brief on how **** the RAF is at personnel management.

You can debate the rights, wrongs and where-with-alls of the argument, but you cannot argue the facts: If you force someone into a ground job and then force a pay cut on them, pilots will leave, fact. :ugh::ugh::ugh: