....different medals mean different things to different people, to some people its recognition of all the hard work they are still putting in, so its not about the medal..or the fact its commemorative, or its a piece of crap that isnt a "real medal" . people have different reasons why they want it, so we shouldnt "slag" em off. to me its this.....
my service was cut short when i had a massive heart attack (not my fault) i volunteered for all the theatres at the time.........but had to stay in u.k. while my mates went on ops.......they got the gongs....i got kicked out :)......so to get the Q.D.J. would have been nice...( as im still doing a bit)...as at least its something else to show for all my hard work, ( would prefer one that i earned in combat ) but not to be........and because of the attatched extra criteria......im 6 hours short of getting it now........it would have been nice, but not gonna lose any sleep over it. , got my vets badge.....which to me is recognition for what i did.

Why doesn't somebody who once was a lollypop lady in Leeds back in 1995 get a QDJM? Makes me bloody livid it does. Bloody livid.

Them Lollypop ladies probably seen more action than half the guys I work with .

QDJM
 

I am very sorry to read all the stuff about chocolate baubles.

This medal is first of all a way of celebrating HM's long and (lets face it) happy reign.

Might it help to think of the award, whether it is received or begrudged, as we would think of a parade - us in tribute rather than us receiving a hand-out ?

One of our contributors knows that I am one of many to value (and pay to have mounted ... and to wear possibly just the once) the Malaysian PJM. In the correspondence and the investiture, I have been conscious more than anything of the honourable intent of the Malaysian government (and the measurable indignity that our MOD wished upon it) when it issued this medal. I value that good intent.

I am happy not to get the QDJM, as I would be happy not to have to bull up for the associated parade. But I am very glad for HM that enough of the medals can be issued - and that most of the recipients will have to do some more marching before they get it !

It's not really a medal; it's more like a badge. The same goes for the QGJM; I got one just for being in uniform at the time even though I couldn't quite do up the top button on my trousers (they seemed to have shrunk)!

On the other hand the QSJM, in '77, because it was rationed, tended to be handed out on merit. I was allocated one medal for my flight of more than 100 RAF and RN tradespersons. I awarded it to a Junior Technician who had just failed his promex to Cpl, for the fourth time!

However, in the preceding 12 months he had developed a servicing procedure (SP) on his own initiative, which reduced the aborted Spey starts on the RAF and RN F4 fleets by more than 50%.

As the Silver Jub Med is also being mentioned. I was serving on a well known Buccaner OCU at that date. There it was dished out via a lottery, certainly for the ground crew. I also know of places where it was given out on 'merit' and if I recall correctly every body at Cranwell on the 'Eagle Flight ?' Ground crew got one.

It was a shambles how it was done and as people have eluded to still leaves a bad taste. It used to cause no end of arguement until we all realised that they were given out in such a random fashon.

As to the petition, no. It would only accompany my LS & GC, somewhere in my attic.

Still, look on the bright side. If you didn't get a QDJM, you might qualify for a NATO Libya gong which has just been announced (if you believe ARRSE and a couple of the other medal collector sites).

1. For following the Pprune thread for 60 days continuous or

2. Contributing at least 13 times with at least 200 words.

3. If on active service in another theatre, ie FI, 13 days continuous:

Provided in all cases that you logged on between 0001 and 2359 on 20110401 all times Zulu.

I like your style, PN. :ok:

Look, it's not a campaign medal, it's a commemorative gong. A wonderful thing for those that are eligible, tough tits for those of us that aren't. It's not for us to decide what it's for, just accept it and crack on. Well done to all those that are serving and that will receive it. That should be our attitude, not whining like petulant teenagers that we don't get it.

Let it go and celebrate Her Majesty's diamond jubilee.

I realize that it is well intended, and have nothing but the greatest respect and admiration for the Queen, however, at the end of the day the award of this medal to many in the military will mean little more than incurring the costs of having their uniform altered and their other medals re-ranked. We have more than enough other reminders of our service and achievements to be proud of.


Quite possibly a petty point, but nevertheless a valid one, at least in my opinion. I'm fairly sure that the original intention was not to have members of the military pay for the privilege of commemorating the jubilee. Personally I would rather see a wider distribution among non military organizations who generally don't receive much regular public recognition.....

Feel free to disagree, as I'm sure many of you will!

Not at all, Biggus. You're right. I don't think it's a "get them to pay" conspiracy, but it is excellent recognition of ALL those who are serving on this great occasion.

Here's an interesting thought. Under the latest DIN here: http://armycadets.com/uploads/docume...1DIN09-012.pdf
At para 4c it states

Now all those that retired with an immediate pension under the Reserves Forces Act 1980 (that joined before 1997) and those that joined after 1997 under Reserve Forces Act 1996, are in the "Regular Reserves" until their liability ceases (IIRC Age 60 for RFA80 airmen and SNCOs, age 60 for all officers and age 55 for RFA96 airmen and SNCOs - and a bit later if you are 1 star+).

So I think an awful lot of people who retired with an immediate pension recently will be eligable. :eek:

LJ

:rolleyes:

Trouble is this particular piece of colored ribbon will end up being worn by countless folk who have never seen a days fighting in their lives, it's nowt but an attendance bauble.

LJ,

Your post 114 has been tried before.

I think the crux is 'effective paid military service'. If you are not in the mob, you're not on the effective strength and your reserve liability is classed as 'non-effective'

O-D

If only you were a PCSO you would qualify ..........!

My good friend Old-Duffer has tried on behalf of RAFR(CC) - which he no longer is - and failed. For those who don't know, RAFR(CC):

1. Hold the Queen's Commission.

2. Have powers of command under the Armed Forces Act.

3. Are themselves subject to the Armed Forces Act.

4. Most wear uniform every day to work.

5. Wear no distinguishing mark (R, VR, VRT or A) on their uniforms.

6. Hold MoD Forms 90 which are indistinguishable from those held by regulars.

7. (And this is probably crucial!) Are paid by MoD and not by RAF!

But "rules is rules" and just like anyone who misses an operational service medal by one day or one mile (and their case must be a stronger one) - tough!

A Final Shot
 

From: Old Duffer, Duffer Castle, Duffer on the Hill, Duffshire

Mr William Nye
PPS to HRH The Prince of Wales
Clarence House
LONDON
SW1A 1BA 12 February 2012

Dear Mr Nye,

The Queen’s Diamond Jubilee Medal (QDJM)

I hope you will forgive my writing on such an apparently trivial issue but I do so because I believe His Royal Highness may wish to be aware of a possible embarrassment regarding eligibility to the award of the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee Medal (QDJM).

The criteria for the award of the QDJM allow for it to be granted to most members of the emergency services and armed forces who meet the principal requirement of five year’s service.

Within the armed forces, however, are a group of reservists described as ‘Military Support Force’ (MSF) or the ‘Civilian Component’ (CC). Despite their title, which emanates from the fact that they are recruited and employed via a civil service arrangement, these personnel are:

• Required to wear uniform and are subject to both the armed forces disciplinary code, and its equivalent civil service code.
• The MSF officers also hold a formal commission, which is recorded in the London Gazette, as well as the individual service lists.
• Furthermore, an officer’s appointment to a CC commission includes a parchment of appointment issued in Her Majesty’s name.
• Their uniform is indistinguishable from that of a regular service person and their duties often require them to exercise command and full disciplinary powers over regular personnel.

Military Support Force personnel are predominantly former regular service men or women and are recruited and employed because they possess competencies which are unlikely to be readily available elsewhere. For example, they may be air traffic controllers or former members of aircrew. Those employed with the cadet forces, oversee the work of the volunteer reservists (who are eligible for the QDJM), provide professional and specialist services to them and are responsible for the nurturing and training of those volunteer reservists.

Many MSF personnel feel a deep sense of disappointment that they are being overlooked for the award of this prestigious recognition of Her Majesty’s reign. Their dismay is heightened when, for example, it is realised that Police Community Support Officers; who are civilians and not warranted police officers and whose powers to act are exceptionally limited, are to be granted the award.

I have raised this matter with the MOD but the Defence Secretariat is unwilling to reconsider the issue nor will they say why MSF personnel are being excluded. Please may I urge His Royal Highness to attempt to redress this injustice, which I bring to your notice not because I will be a beneficiary of any change but because MSF personnel are an integral and respected element of the armed forces and I believe their omission from the award’s criteria is unfair, particularly when the commitment required by some other eligible groups is significantly less than that required from MSF personnel.

Yours sincerely

Old Duffer

Old - Duffer - your letter is grammatical, contains no spelling mistakes and presents cogent arguments in plain English.

As such it is only likely to confuse the civil servant who is given the job of dealing with it, and I therefore fear it has no chance of success :rolleyes:

Does Terminal Leave qualify as paid effective service?

Nice one again O-D! Don't want to seem picky, but isn't MSF Military Support Function? That notwithstanding, a beautifully crafted letter - and who knows, some friendly journo lurking here may take up the case.....

Aeronut, yes.