So if we allow these tattoos just in case we don't get the best people in the Service, where does it end? Let's do away with all regulations, turn up when we want (after tattoo appointment of course), do as we are told only if it suits us etc. Blimey, wouldn't want want any of these petty regulations getting in the way of employing Mr/Mrs Bright Spark now would we? You have to draw a line in the sand somewhere, you cannot keep nibbling away at rules just to accommodate one or two talented individuals.

Thanks Tanker, very interesting link, I suspect the position of Army Sergeant Major will rarely leave the Guards brigade! ;)

I did 30 years in the RAF. Admittedly some time ago, and I never came up against problems with tattoos, gays or other deviants. As I left in 1997, and, friends who serve today tell me, an old dinosaur like myself would not survive in today's RAF. So be it, I'm not ashamed that I did my time, I'm not ashamed that the standards of my day do not comply with modern, PC practises. I'm very glad that I left when I did though.

Smudge

I reckon you are right. Personally I think the whole thing is a guards plot to deprive the RLC (previously the RAOC) from having the most senior warrant officers in the army, namely their conductors. Must have irked the Garrison Sergeant Major, London District, a guards appointment, to know that a jumped up spanner basher was senior to him!

I don't see what the issue is. Every organisation, from the Royal Family down to the Cub Scouts has its own culture, rules and regulations. If you want to join, you must then accept that you have to toe the line; if you don't want to abide by the cultures, rules and regulations then either don't join or if already a member, be prepared for any fallout.

As Sir Alex Ferguson noted, no player was bigger than the Club (Man Utd for those unfamiliar) and he would happily drop his star player if he was behaving in a way detrimental to the Club's performance, standards or values. This lady's tattoos say nothing about her as an individual or her competence, although I might suggest a comment on her judgement - I suspect there are plenty of customer facing organisations that might also have an issue - but she is not bigger than the RAF no matter how able, and her tattoos do fall foul of the RAF's cultures, rules and regulations. It really is that simple.

Melchett

There are, there are certainly plenty of airlines currently recruiting who have a ban on visible tattoos for customer facing staff.

She lost 6 stone in her journey to get to selection. Good on her! That must show significant motivation.

I hope she decides that journey is worth getting those particular tattoos removed.

Introduction of regulation Hijab should cover it. - Would also make todays Airforce more inclusive culturally.

I think you'll find there already is one .........

...... sure I've seen one - must look for a photo to post.

Can't find a photo (yet), but from AP 1358 (RAF Dress Regs) Para 0317c:

There's certainly a regulation turban for our Sikh chaps. Back in my UAS QFI-ing days at RAF Abingdon, we had a Sikh lad and I had great fun insisting that stores provided him with one...

"A what, Sir?"
"RAF pattern turban, Sikhs for the use of!"
"Isn't such a thing!"
"Is - get one please!"

So they did - but by the time it arrived the boss had read him his tea leaves at the 6-monthly 'Night of the Long Knives' (which he'd introduced to weed out students who had poor Progress/Attitude/Technique scores) and he was no longer with us. I've no idea how he used to do so, but he managed to get his hair and 'sleeping turban' under a normal bone dome.

No doubt there's still a single RAF turban on the stores shelf at 'Dalton Barracks'...

No demand Sir, it was sent to surplus sales, it will have 6 months to get a new one.

Our Sikh engine Cpl. had to LPO his turban material and have it made up. He had 2, light blue for No1 and navy for working. Being engines, he was known to all and sundry as "Turbine"

As I recall there was a Flt Lt Singh on 633 Sqdn who wore a turban on the ground complete with badge. Sadly KIA on the attack on the V2 rocket fuel plant in Norway.

QUOTE:

I reckon you are right. Personally I think the whole thing is a guards plot to deprive the RLC (previously the RAOC) from having the most senior warrant officers in the army, namely their conductors. Must have irked the Garrison Sergeant Major, London District, a guards appointment, to know that a jumped up spanner basher was senior to him!

The seniority of the Conductor is a widely held myth.
Yes, the appointment was the first [by two years] in 1879, when Conductors were Warranted.
Yes they have always been in the most senior sub-set of Warrant Officers [the members of this set have varied historically]
Yes they are alphabetically before such as Master Gunners and Garrison Sgt Majors

But no, seniority as an individual WO I. only stems from the date of his/her Warrant and, in relevant circumstances, from the job description.

The myth has been nurtured for many years and will no doubt soldier on.

The RLC are still nurturing it!

Contents

Yes, I told that site years ago.

Right from the word go, Army QVRs, KRs and now QRs all spell out the dreadful truth to the Conductors ....... at best it was only alphabetical in a group without a primus inter pares.

AR1et al - Please see carefully worded Post # 5.....:ok:

Jack

Recruiting trouble
 

It is many years since I was a flight commander dealing with new recruits at Hereford.
The philosophy then, and probably still, was that with many applicants for each slot.we could seek the very best or take those nearly so but less likely to give us problems later
We opted for the second group not to save ourselves trouble but to allow us to devote our available time to those we had. The reduction in problems meant more time for those who needed it
Young people under training stress often need staff attention and such help produces dividends for all
Recruits need an amalgam of the skills and wit to do the job and the personal qualities to do well in the service, both are vital. Part of this doing well in the service is an willingness to submit to some or all of the service demands. Of course sometimes the demands are not acceptable to the individual and they opt to leave. Successful training needs recruitment of those likely to avoid these pitfalls

Indeed, As Napoleon said:
"Our best potential Generals resign as Captains"

So I had an Air Chief Marshal's baton in my nav' bag after all!