MSOCS, it's pointless doing a roadshow if they already know what they want to hear and what they want to turn a blind eye to. There's no point if they are unwilling to make the improvements that the shop floor points out.

Even an ""independent"" pay review body is a joke, when the president of the review body gets sacked for disagreeing with politicians.

It's not an "independent" pay review body, and to be fair it doesn't claim to be....

Biggus are you sure about that? Just Google "independent pay review body sacked".

Adviser sacked by David Cameron after Armed Forces pay row 'paid the price' for supporting troops - Telegraph

What is meant by "independence"?

The AFPRB says that it provides "independent" advice to the government, however, if you follow this link:

https://www.gov.uk/government/upload..._43rd_2014.pdf

It's the actual 2014 report. Go in about 3 or 4 pages and read the terms of reference. Basically the AFPRB is told that in making its recommendation it must allow for how much MOD can actually afford, and what the government inflation target is. If that doesn't hamstring its "independence" then I don't know what does....

Correct, Biggus. I can't believe anyone thought otherwise.

Of all the TG1 people I know who are banging out, not one has mentioned pay. The 2 biggest issues seem to be environmental (e.g moving Leuchars to Lossie) and op tempo. How many ops are Marham supporting now? Good luck getting anyone to answer the phone down there. The move to 6 month OOAs for non-formed units is the icing on the cake.

Independent pay review, my arse.
Remind me, the official reason that the civilian Police earn their pension at 1/60ths, but the Military earn it at 1/70ths? Official answer...a Police career is classed as a Dangerous occupation.

OAP

Next year we earn at 1/47ths....

LJ :ok:

Smoke and mirrors Leon. If you think that the 2015 pension is an improvement upon 2005 terms, please say so now!:ooh:

OAP

OAP, Pension 2015 is certainly an improvement for the govt cash holdings ;)

The numbers pulling the plug is a bit high at the moment but it's not really that far off what was going on back in 2008, albeit it is still increasing. However, back in 2008 the light blue were recruiting loads to counter that. Today, numbers in are much less than numbers out despite reaching the 33k target (google dasa mod) I guess 33k may well have been a WAG in 2010 and manning are working to new figures.
:ok:

Having read through this thread, with the different arguments about the reasons non aircraft trades are equally deserving of equal pay I have seen no mention of the fact that every day that an aircraft techie works on an aircraft he is signing legal documents, documents that could, in the event of an accident, put them in prison for a number of years. How many other trades could claim that.
If an MT driver, cook/chef, shiney and many other trades gets posted to a new station, many of them will can carry on almost uninterrupted as their new environment is virtually identical to the previous, yet an aircraft tradesman can expect further training on type as changes could be fixed wing(small or large) to rotary or of course, these days, to UAVs. Some types now requiring civilian licencing and approvals, a bonus for those that get it and will prove to be useful when they leave the RAF if they are considering a future in the civilian industry.
Maybe I am biased, but at the wrong end of my chosen career to do me any good, but I do believe that aircraft trades do deserve better pay, pay which should be reflected in the pension as well !!

Looking at pure numbers is pointless. You need to look at branch and trade specifics, as some areas are worse than others.

BA DEP won't help and if BA fire the starting gun, the worry has to be others may follow suit. Many companies have been accruing large cash reserves post downturn and paying down debt, it now looks as if those cash reserves are starting to be used for business growth and investment, at a time it appears at least, as if the military are wanting to start to reduce the outflow rate.

Interesting times all in IMHO

gamecock,

I completely agree with your post and have not considered pure pay to be a driving factor for a number of years. The compound effect of being told (not asked, as we're military!) to deploy overseas yet again, after only a month or two off the back of a 4-6 month OOA, is killing our people and their good will. Our families are suffering and harmony has been nothing but a buzz word whose guidelines have been stiffly ignored since the concept was defined. We're being asked to do even more with even less and our "zero-defect" and "yes" cultures are wholly responsible and drive our SOs to constantly inform our VSOs that "we can do it" at every turn of the handle. Something's gotta give!

egdg - I never said it wasn't a factor, only that it wasn't the main factor. Most of the 22yr/LOS 30 guys I've spoken to are leaving reluctantly, and probably wouldn't if the RAF was in the same state as it was just 5 or 6 years ago! Most of them don't want to go offshore - who wants to start that lifestyle in their 40s? This means they have taken on an even less stable work/life balance than when they were in the mob.

And I've never seen so many people leaving at the 12 yr point. The effect on trade competence (training plus experience) is noticeable. If the new generation of aircraft are supposed to tell you what component to change, and TG1 are nothing but box-changers, why are the Q courses 4 times longer?/

Both my previous trade during regular service (supply) and current RAuxAF trade (nursing) require having to make regular legal declarations that, in the event of error, could lead to a prison sentence.

THS

None of us would argue that nurses etc really do earn good pay - but to argue that a supplier signs as many legally binding documents as an a/c tradesman is quite comical :).

Depending on what job/role we are currently carrying out - aircraft techs can be signing legal documents almost by the minute,although sometimes it is the days where you just sign a couple of very significant lines to state that the a/c is safe to fly where you really earn the money !

Who said suppliers sign "as many"? I'll quote what I originally quoted and highlight the relevant bit here.

No mention is made of number of signatures in a day, just a 'boast' of how many trades can claim similar.

In the example of a supplier then an easy example off the top of my head is DG declarations. An IATA DG declaration is a legal document, incorrectly packaged DG consignments that have gone on to cause incidents on a/c have resulted in IATA DG declaration signatories receiving custodial sentences.

As is the IMDG Dangerous Goods Declaration on a shipment going by sea; one of the few documents (like the IATA version) where the signatory will end up in the dock, along with the head of the organisation who runs it.

Army Mover - Indeed. I was merely concentrating on flight safety matters though as it appears 'flight safety + signature' is the arguement our spanner turning friends are jumping on now.