PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Military Aviation (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation-57/)
-   -   Back in the day.... (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/606714-back-day.html)

MPN11 18th Mar 2018 19:38


Originally Posted by John Nichol (Post 10088399)
Cheers MPN - I was convinced a couple of WRAFs I served alongside as a young JT/Cpl 82-86 had to leave when they announced they were pregnant. But in the words of Mrs Clinton, I must have "mis-remembered".

That may have been the pregnancy clause, of course. Marriage doesn’t necessarily cause pregnancy!!

Herod 18th Mar 2018 21:10


Marriage doesn’t necessarily cause pregnancy!!
NOW he tells me!

Fareastdriver 18th Mar 2018 21:17

What does?

airpolice 19th Mar 2018 00:13

I'm so old, that I remember when pregnancy caused marriage.

NutLoose 19th Mar 2018 00:51


I knew a married couple who were riggers on 20 Sqn in 1977, CPL/SACW, she had had the option to leave on marriage, and would be discharged if she fell pregnant. She also had the option of leaving at 28 days notice if she so desired, she threatened to exercise this option when the Flt Sgt put them on opposite shifts so they would never see each other. There was no chain of command conflict as he was on rectifications and she was working on the line doing A/Fs, B/Fs etc.
Correct the only, the only SACW at RAF Odiham in the late 70's worked in SHQ and she was married to one of the JT's on the chinook side of 240 OCU, there being no single WRAF accomodation

It was only in the 80's that they were required to carry muskets too?, before that i think it was optional.



..

The Oberon 19th Mar 2018 06:29

I seem to remember, late 60s, that there were 2 types of WRAF service. There was the regular living in the block type, but there were also Locally Employed Airwomen, who lived with their serving husbands and did an 8-5 job with no strings, duties etc, attached. If there were vacancies they would follow their husbands on posting. I even knew one who went with her husband to AKR and was locally employed out there. I also seem to remember that, on marriage, a regular type could become Locally Employed, thereby not having to leave.

vascodegama 19th Mar 2018 06:42

If memory serves, there was a short period during which MOD was slow in reacting to a change in European Law which meant that some ladies were due compensation for having to leave. Funny how they were all going to make VSO level!

airpolice 19th Mar 2018 07:47


Originally Posted by The Oberon (Post 10088817)
I seem to remember, late 60s, that there were 2 types of WRAF service. There was the regular living in the block type, but there were also Locally Employed Airwomen, who lived with their serving husbands and did an 8-5 job with no strings, duties etc, attached. If there were vacancies they would follow their husbands on posting. I even knew one who went with her husband to AKR and was locally employed out there. I also seem to remember that, on marriage, a regular type could become Locally Employed, thereby not having to leave.

Known in the 70s as "Locally Purchased" staff.

Pontius Navigator 19th Mar 2018 07:54

Finningley was 'manned' with LEAW. One, used to work weekends at Marham. She was from Barnsley, which accounted for her nickname.

BEagle 19th Mar 2018 08:00

As Flt Cdts in 1968, during our early lectures concerning 'customs of the service', we were told that one was not permitted to have a relationship with a WRAF office on the same station :rolleyes: . But in those days there were many more stations, so a convenient posting might solve that Victorian nonsense.

About 9 years later, I was at Biggin Hill for aircrew reselection, having bonged the Bucc OCU. Rather than take gardening leave, I worked in SHQ which was quite fun at the time - 'march outs' never had it so easy, much to DOE's chagrin. But one of the officers there was in a relationship with a WRAF officer who lived in the OM - and was under the watchful eye of some ancient old biddy Air Cdre who was Queen Bee* who guarded the virtue of her 'girls' like some Mother Superior. If the couple wanted to go out for a drink or dinner, they had to leave independently and meet up when safely out of her view...

A good thing that the Queen Bee never found out that the number of aircrew doing reselection was complemented every few weeks by fighter controllers who'd bonged their courses - most of whom were female...:E

There was much frowning and wagging of fingers if any 10 Sqn officer should form a relationship with an ALM or (female - this was before Pink Wednesday) steward - after the bollocking letters and interviews, if the relationship persisted, then one or other would be required to leave - even in the early '80s! One chap and his ex-ALM wife had their "Though shalt not" letters framed and hanging in their MQ - much to the fury of any pompous SO who happened to see them. Style!

*For younger readers, 'Queen Bee' = O i/c WRAF. Many a phone directory was amended so that 'Station bike store' had the same phone number....

OldnDaft 19th Mar 2018 08:42

When the policy was introduced, all maternity pers were posted to Personnel Holding Flight (PHF) at Innsworth - I was the first Maternity Clerk to administer these cases. To say the policy was rushed is an understatement, it was genuinely being made on the hoof and was amended on an almost weekly basis in response to various questions/complaints from those involved. For example, initially all the RAF had to do was ensure the returning SP was allocated a post appropriate to their rank and trade/branch so there was no guarantee of a return to the former Unit and we regularly had cases of the SP being posted to a Unit hundreds of miles from the previous duty station. Clearly, this was challenged and the poor staff in what was then known as S10(Air) had to attend employment tribunals etc. Eventually the policy was amended and posts had to be held open for the duration of the maternity absence. It was a very interesting job for a youngish SAC and I had an early insight into policy making by attending meetings with ranks up to and including 1*; I felt valued as my opinion was always considered and in some cases acted upon - a totally different kind of post as it followed my first tour at Bruggen!

Krystal n chips 19th Mar 2018 09:03

I certainly know of a case in the 70's where a PMRAFNS Flt.Lt was happily involved with a J/T until authority got involved.

She was given the ultimatum of commission vs marriage and, being the lady she is, told authority what to do with the commission.

The unfortunate irony to this was, some years and one divorce later, said J/T got his commission.

There's also another little bit of arcane management from this era.

If an airman separated from his wife, his wife being a civilian, then authority took a very dim view of another airman subsequently becoming involved with the lady because she was deemed to be, in that equally arcane parlance, still "the wife of ". ...irrespective of the fact she was a civilian.

People didn't even have to be on the same station or locality for this draconian philosophy to be imposed.

The Oberon 19th Mar 2018 09:06

Probably total BS but there was a rumour that in the case of an "accidental" pregnancy, a quick, discreet visit to Wroughton, Nocton Hall or somewhere similar could be arranged.

Beancountercymru 19th Mar 2018 09:12

Personnel Holding Flight (PHF) at Innsworth
 
I attended an Air Cadet annual camp at Innsworth and our ACLO told us he was responsible for all the pregnant Airwomen in the RAF !

He then revealed he was OC Personnel Holding Flight

Pontius Navigator 19th Mar 2018 09:44

There was a female RAF Doctor who had an affair with one of her staff. As they would not terminate the affair the System posted her thousands of miles away.

Sad to say, but as she was a nymphomaniac that worked a treat.

Pontius Navigator 19th Mar 2018 09:50


Originally Posted by The Oberon (Post 10088905)
Probably total BS but there was a rumour that in the case of an "accidental" pregnancy, a quick, discreet visit to Wroughton, Nocton Hall or somewhere similar could be arranged.

Pregnancies was the stock in trade of the hospital at Akrotiri.

NutLoose 19th Mar 2018 10:25

Do they still bed check the under 18 WAAF's at 10 or 11pm?? I always thought that was such an archaic law.

Incidentely, when on detachment to Lossie, another Sqn was also there who had a lovely young engineering officer, later that night when we went down town, there she was sitting on one of the SAC's (off her shift) knees, they had been dating for months and while the sqn engineers knew of it, no one else did.

Bladdered 19th Mar 2018 11:03

At Laarbruch in the early 80's a single WRAF PM from Wegburg and her Cpl boyfriend from Laarbruch were heard having noisy relations in a caravan in the caravan park near XV Sqn and when an A/Cpl Plod knocked on the door and asked for ID, she was daft enough to show him her 1250. Shipped straight back to UK!! Times have changed!!

Pontius Navigator 19th Mar 2018 11:11

A new flt lt took her J/T boyfriend to the Summer Ball. The biggest objections were from the staff having to serve a JNCO.

She was spoken with and it was identified as a failure in instruction at Cranditz.

spekesoftly 19th Mar 2018 11:29


Originally Posted by John Nichol (Post 10088136)

Secondly, nattering to another old hand earlier, I was told that if a WRAF got married she also had to leave - I seem to remember something along those lines but was this the case?


There does seem to be a bit of disagreement about the "having to leave on marriage" aspect?
No doubt the rules and regs will have changed since I left the RAF in 1978, but this is my recollection:-

When I arrived at RAF Strubby in 1971, there was a single WRAF Plt Off ATCO who did not have to leave after subsequently marrying a RAF Navigator stationed elsewhere. I can still remember her surnames, pre and post marriage. Approaching tourex, she was eventually posted to RAF West Raynham to be nearer to her husband. I also recall that she had more than a passing resemblance to Liza Minnelli !


All times are GMT. The time now is 22:17.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.