PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Military Aviation (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation-57/)
-   -   VeRR- have you experience of it? (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/618996-verr-have-you-experience.html)

Thereismore 2nd Mar 2019 20:59

VeRR- have you experience of it?
 
Hello all,

I am looking at a possible SO2 engagement under VeRR having been approached on LinkedIn and would value your experience if you have been or currently are working in a role under these reserve terms.

I had not been interested in reserve work in the past due to the ‘all or nothing’ options and a few days a week under these terms might fit. Trying to find the specifics of the TCoS online has proved rather fruitless and I am awaiting response from Cranwell to my enquiries.
One of my queries is about pay as it appears that the pro-rata rate may be based on a (reserve) SO2 salary /365- making the daily rate approx £150. If so, this would be highly unattactive and way below what you would expect to attract for the cognitive capacity and skills demanded by the role. It would be very challenging to attract people into a part time role at this rate.

Any insights appreciated.

Wensleydale 3rd Mar 2019 07:15

..although it is around the main salary of a step I-step 2 full time squadron leader I believe. http://www.armedforces.co.uk/rafpays...p#.XHuLA_Z2uUk Welcome to military pay scales!

PostMeHappy 3rd Mar 2019 07:20

I am on VeRR as part of the BSG project run at some of our largest bases, having just left regular Service at 55.

For me the salary isn’t the attraction, more keeping in touch with what I had been doing for some 30 years along with most of my mates as well as keeping the old grey cells ticking over.

Whilst I can always say ‘no’ to any task given under VeRR, the Service will expect you to provide value in your input and I find it a happy balance, although with the current gapping I could easily find work to fill 5 days a week !!!

But it looks like your offer is a more ‘fixed’ working arrangement, so my experience may not strictly read across....good luck !!


Chris Kebab 3rd Mar 2019 11:53

Just looked at the current VeRR vacancies page https://www.raf.mod.uk/ftrs-ptvr-adc-verr/

Then spotted the final line "VeRR posts are usually created for a minimum of 10 and a maximum of 90 days per year".

Love the idea of either of those two particular SO2 posts currently listed as being capable of being undertaken effectively if only filled for those periods. They look pretty full-on to me, or are these VeRR posts "job share" with others over a full year?

Thereismore 3rd Mar 2019 14:44

Thank you for your views.

i was glad to see that there is at least an attempt at a flexible approach in engaging reserve experience and the proposal is very much along the lines ‘whatever / however we can make it work’ .

By the aounds of it, the salary equation appears about right at /365 for a daily rate which reduces a nominally acceptable salary rate to ....well... not so.

A change to making the pro-rata daily rate reflective of a 5 day working week ( which is how most of these roles are) would at least make these roles worth looking at if you are someone who is balancing a portfolio of income streams. There are plenty of us who left at sub 40 who can provide energy and value to staff roles and have flexibility to arrange our working regimes, however the rate would need to get somewhere close to opportunity cost, time and cognitive switch put into the role.

I’ll await formal responses though for now it appears that (sadly) this is not something that can attract someone like me who left at 38, has time flexibility and but has to ensure that it the income fairly compensated the energy.

Wrathmonk 3rd Mar 2019 15:09

Neither of the SO2 posts on that page are under VeRR terms - click on them and you will see they are FTRS (HC) [so full time]..

With the VeRR Scheme, as I understand it, once approved you sit on a 'waiting list' and if a job becomes available (perhaps back filling an OOA, filling a gapped post temporarily or filling a 'project' job) then it gets circulated to all those eligible. Maximum of 90 days per year (the year starts Apr 1) of which 9 days are paid leave. Not all the 'benefits' of the service are available to VeRR. It seems to me you are more a 'consultant' than a reservist!

Chris Kebab 3rd Mar 2019 15:31

...fair cop; looked at the post titles, went wibble wibble, had flashbacks to a particularly grim ground tour in MB and didn't click any further!

Thereismore 3rd Mar 2019 15:50


Originally Posted by Wrathmonk (Post 10405817)
Neither of the SO2 posts on that page are under VeRR terms - click on them and you will see they are FTRS (HC) [so full time]..

With the VeRR Scheme, as I understand it, once approved you sit on a 'waiting list' and if a job becomes available (perhaps back filling an OOA, filling a gapped post temporarily or filling a 'project' job) then it gets circulated to all those eligible. Maximum of 90 days per year (the year starts Apr 1) of which 9 days are paid leave. Not all the 'benefits' of the service are available to VeRR. It seems to me you are more a 'consultant' than a reservist!

Yes, that is the 'deal' and I think it is a great step towards a more flexible approach at bringing in experienced people and extra capacity. The option for a short-'ish' or medium-term engagement is very much in line with how many of us work outside of the military and importantly it allows us to make this fit around our other commitments. The role I am in discussions about is SO2 and the preference is FTRS however it has been unfilled for 18 months and the augmentation of VeRR would not preclude the post being subsequently filled FT and retain the VeRR additional capacity.

Just the one snag... it isn't financially attractive enough.

Wrathmonk 3rd Mar 2019 15:57


particularly grim ground tour in MB
That doesn't narrow it down very much!

Bing 3rd Mar 2019 20:42


Originally Posted by Wrathmonk (Post 10405817)
Neither of the SO2 posts on that page are under VeRR terms - click on them and you will see they are FTRS (HC) [so full time]..

Actually FTRS(FC) so you get pretty much all the benefits* etc. and full X-factor, so like being a regular but you can't get drafted somewhere else at short notice.

*I think there's something obscure you don't get with FC in certain circumstances.

Thereismore 8th Mar 2019 19:42

Feedback
 
I have the results of my research into the TCoS that are applied to VeRR engagements and wanted to share here so that others who are looking at this can take a view.

The SO2 staff post that was ‘in need’ has been gapped for 15 months and ‘all options’ were being investigated by the desk and the Dept head with the gap. In absence of a regular the preference was for FTRS however there was a genuine appetite to try and find solutions that would fit an individual’s commitment appetite; this is what attracted me.

Unfortunately it transpired that only a FTRS commitment would not jeopardise the post in the long run so a augmentation through VeRR was proposed.

Whilst a 2 day a week commitment for a number of weeks a year (30-45) would have worked the remuneration does not. At reserve (LC) payscales and abatement for number of years since leaving I would have been starting at OF3 starting annual salary equivalent of £47k.... BUT the pay is pro rata based on 365 working days a year equating to £130 a day, or £16 an hour.


For comparison - these rates are would be expected for entry level book keeping. A part time engagement for someone with the skills required of a key staff role would attract in the region of £50-80 equivalent hourly rate.


These terms will struggle to attract a mid- career individual with the skills and cognitive abilities required for such a role. At best you will get a full pension retiree who wants the socialisation and has the time. This is a shame because the service denies itself a pool of dynamic talent and there are many of us around who are part of the newer ways of working with multiple income streams and commitments.

Unfortunately I have retrenched back into my previous position; there is little that could attract me back into a service commitment because the structure has not evolved sufficiently from ‘weekend reserves’ or FTRS.

BEagle 9th Mar 2019 15:49

Never has the expression "No bucks - no Buck Rogers" been more apposite!

Thereismore 19th Oct 2019 21:50

For comparison
 
Some further feedback (For anyone that cares!) During my conversations with the ‘desk’ that was looking to fill this vacancy (remember this was a short term fix contract for approx 12-18 months) I provided real world comparative examples of what such a job should be paying (they weren’t taken seriously, or rather no one could see how to change the system to fit reality). £500/ day is the current rate that such a post has to compete against - and unless they can raise it from the £150 offered it will forever fail to attract anyone except retirees. Flexible employment models are still a long way off in the MOD.

Lima Juliet 20th Oct 2019 08:22

Mate, are you smoking the whackky baccy? How you could you pay an SO2 Reservist £500/day and then let them work 8 days a month and take home the same as a Regular does for working 22 days a month? There would be a riot!

I think you are trying to compare VERR and ADC to contract consultancy in the commercial sector - it isn’t the same. The whole idea is to offer roles/posts out to those that still want to serve, with a much reduced commitment, for a symbiotic relationship between the Service and the part-time retired workforce. If you want £500/day or much more then come knocking via the various outsourced contracts in MOD working for the likes of PWC, EY, KPMG, et al. They get paid those sorts of consultancy fees for fixed term projects/programmes.

Finally, as in commercial land, if you don’t like the rate that VERR/ADC pays then don’t do it...

VinRouge 20th Oct 2019 11:37


Originally Posted by Lima Juliet (Post 10598909)
Mate, are you smoking the whackky baccy? How you could you pay an SO2 Reservist £500/day and then let them work 8 days a month and take home the same as a Regular does for working 22 days a month? There would be a riot!

I think you are trying to compare VERR and ADC to contract consultancy in the commercial sector - it isn’t the same. The whole idea is to offer roles/posts out to those that still want to serve, with a much reduced commitment, for a symbiotic relationship between the Service and the part-time retired workforce. If you want £500/day or much more then come knocking via the various outsourced contracts in MOD working for the likes of PWC, EY, KPMG, et al. They get paid those sorts of consultancy fees for fixed term projects/programmes.

Finally, as in commercial land, if you don’t like the rate that VERR/ADC pays then don’t do it...

wouldn’t be a problem if service pay for regulars wasn’t so sh*te!

Foghorn Leghorn 20th Oct 2019 14:16


Originally Posted by Lima Juliet (Post 10598909)
Mate, are you smoking the whackky baccy? How you could you pay an SO2 Reservist £500/day and then let them work 8 days a month and take home the same as a Regular does for working 22 days a month? There would be a riot!

I think you are trying to compare VERR and ADC to contract consultancy in the commercial sector - it isn’t the same. The whole idea is to offer roles/posts out to those that still want to serve, with a much reduced commitment, for a symbiotic relationship between the Service and the part-time retired workforce. If you want £500/day or much more then come knocking via the various outsourced contracts in MOD working for the likes of PWC, EY, KPMG, et al. They get paid those sorts of consultancy fees for fixed term projects/programmes.

Finally, as in commercial land, if you don’t like the rate that VERR/ADC pays then don’t do it...


LJ, with respect, the pay is particularly poor if you want high quality individuals with experience to come back in to the Service under a reservist scheme. Whilst I agree, circa £500 per day is not feasible, the pay per day for reservists (dependant upon which reservist scheme you come back in on) when compared to similar jobs in the civilian profession, such as a pilot, is poor.

Lima Juliet 20th Oct 2019 14:52


Originally Posted by VinRouge (Post 10599041)

wouldn’t be a problem if service pay for regulars wasn’t so sh*te!

It’s not “sh*te” but then again you don’t value the pension and think that’s all a fiddle!!!

Lima Juliet 20th Oct 2019 15:02


Originally Posted by Foghorn Leghorn (Post 10599150)
LJ, with respect, the pay is particularly poor if you want high quality individuals with experience to come back in to the Service under a reservist scheme. Whilst I agree, circa £500 per day is not feasible, the pay per day for reservists (dependant upon which reservist scheme you come back in on) when compared to similar jobs in the civilian profession, such as a pilot, is poor.

We haven’t got enough flying to go around for the Regulars as it is, so why would you want heaps of Reservists coming back to earn 3-4 times as much per day and take the flying? Especially, for the more complex aircraft that require you to remain competent as well as current. The flying is one of the main reasons join up and hang around - when you start to get less than 200-250/year then the idea of Reservist Aircrew (even if paid the same) just wouldn’t make sense. So to pay them more than their Regular counterparts for that pleasure would make even less sense.

Easy Street 20th Oct 2019 17:52


Originally Posted by Lima Juliet (Post 10599183)
We haven’t got enough flying to go around for the Regulars as it is. [...] The flying is one of the main reasons join up and hang around - when you start to get less than 200-250/year then the idea of Reservist Aircrew (even if paid the same) just wouldn’t make sense

That doesn’t really fit with the notion of a ‘next generation Air Force’ IMHO. 20-25hrs per month was the benchmark twenty years or so ago, when a sim was something you did to practice instrument flying or emergencies and not much else. The economics of the UK’s F35 commitment were predicated on more or less a 50:50 blend of live and synthetic training (it may even have favoured synthetic but I can’t be sure of the number). And OPSEC more or less mandates a lot of tactical training to be done in the sim. If any of their airships are considering the low flying rate to be a retention issue then I’d suggest that instead of flying 100-125 hours per year more than needed, they add the cost of 1 flying hour to regular pilot salaries and use the engineering capacity to grow the number (regular or reserve) of pilots to help make the exercise and deployment plot more sustainable at the individual level.

Lima Juliet 20th Oct 2019 18:04

Easy Street

Hmmm, if you truly believe that then I suspect that we are doomed. People don’t join up to fly sims and it won’t matter what you pay - they will join up, fly a couple of tours and leave. We have a hard enough job dragging people to staff for 2-3 years, but if they hardly ever fly (apart from sims) then the excitement factor will quickly go.


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:49.


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