Is the AFPRB fit for purpose
 

With public sector pay in the spotlight, and after a decade of pay freeze, 1% caps and the most recent 3.75%, which was significantly below inflation, is the AFPRB fit for purpose.

Having read the Def Sec’s remit letter for the 2023 award
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/remit-letter-to-the-armed-forces-pay-review-body-2023-to-2024/afprb-remit-letter-from-the-defence-secretary-2023-to-2024
there’s nothing independent about the process, this of course is nothing new.

As we see the Armed Forces slip behind other public sector bodies, will the Def Sec stand up for the Armed Forces, or will he just save his own skin and not rock the boat. Personnel are only able to vote with their feet, the Armed Forces are losing too many people, a decent pay rise is required with a truly independent review IMHO.

We're back to the same sort of situation as we were in 1977 on.

Is the AFPRB fit for purpose?
 

… NO!

End of transmission.

BV

No!!.

At which point, there was a significant exodus, certainly of engineers...

Since any findings and recommendations can be watered down or ignored, I reckon it is like a broken pencil.

Indeed; or "adopted in full", when it coughs up a ****e settlement recommendation.

CG

dah dit/dah dah dah

None of the the public sector pay boards are fit for purpose as none are independent. They all work within tight affordability parameters set by the Government meaning that that is their priority and despite protestations to the contrary, the Government often ignores their recommendations. The armed forces and police are Crown employees so we (I'm a police officer) don't have the industrial rights that other public and private sector employees have, but we don't get anything such as a fair pay body, in return for those lack of rights.

Armed Forces Public Relations Bureau?

!977 the year I bought myself out of the RAF.

I was just about to post something similar, so thank you for saving me the time.

As a former serviceman and current nurse I have been and am subject to these supposed 'independant' Pay Review Boards. They are nothing of the type and have been ignored (contrary to the "we follow the PRB recommendations" tripe being spouted currently) or followed as is politically expedient.

With respect to the lack of industrial rights the Police and military have, I'm always very vocal about this fact if I ever hear fellow trade union reps make negative comments towards the military/police with regards to providing MACA.

No Pay Review Body will ever be wholly independent of Government. No Government, of any political flavour, could allow its expenditures to be controlled by a body that is not politically accountable. Treasury would simply not allow it.

N

I’ll turn the question on its head; which UK organisation is fit for purpose? NHS? DVLA? HMRC? CAA? Ombudsman in any field? TV Licensing Authority? Border Force? Government?

Not meant as a rant. Living abroad, and I now believe the UK’s general dysfunctional organisation must play a part in its overall decreasing productivity.

Whilst on pensions, 10 years after AFPS15 was first mooted and clearly illegal, still waiting for the remedy…

Hoots

Yes, and, No…

These are the AFPRB annual pay rises over the past 20 years plotted against annual average inflation:2022 3.75% vs ~8% (we won’t know the exact number until next year) Expected loss
2021 0% vs 2.5% Loss
2020 2% vs 0.85% Win
2019 2.9% vs 1.8% Win
2018 2.9% vs 2.5% Win
2017 1% vs 2.7% Loss
2016 1% vs 0.6% Win
2015 1% vs 0.04% Win
2014 1% vs 1.5% Loss
2013 1.5% vs 2.6% Loss
2012 0% vs 2.8% Loss
2011 0% vs 4.5% Loss
2010 2% vs 3.3% Loss
2009 2.8% vs 2.2% Win
2008 2.6% vs 3.6% Loss
2007 3.3% vs 2.3% Win
2006 3% vs 2.3% Win
2005 3% vs 2% Win
2004 2.8% vs 1.3% Win
2003 3.2% vs 1.4% Win
2002 4.2% vs 1.3% Win

So that is 12 ‘Win’ Years and 8 ‘Loss’ Years - so overall about the same if you’ve been in 20 years, but you’ve sh@t out if you’ve been in 10 years or so. For those of us that have been in around 30 years then the wins of the 1990s mean that we are well up.

The average annual inflation rates taken from here: https://www.rateinflation.com/inflat...nflation-rate/

Now the other thing to remember is annual pay progression and promotion. The average promotion sees a 5-8% increase and pay progression 2-3% over 6-8 levels depending on rank. So if you add those all up, then it’s very unlikely that anyone is being paid less now than they were even 10 years ago in so-called “real terms”.

What the AFPRB is not good for is predicting the future. The pay round is decided 6 months ahead of the announcement by the Review Bodies. So in the recent example, then inflation was around 4% at the turn of 21/22, but Putin did the unimaginable and that smashed up food and energy prices to peak at 11% (and likely an overall annual average of around 8%). So what was likely to be a fair pay rise to match inflation post COVID at 3.75% now seems like a shabby deal. If you want to blame anyone then blame mad-Vlad!

Chauderon
[/QUOTE]AFPS15 was first mooted and clearly illegal[QUOTE]

AFPS15 was not illegal, the way that age discrimination was used to forcibly move, or not move, a person to pension was the illegal bit. AFPS15 was and is quite legal, as was the forced move of everyone on 1 Apr 22. There are also some crazy myths about AFPS15 about it being worse - not so for many - anyone serving to 60 is likely to be way better off than the legacy pensions (too many reasons to list) but as ever, there are some losers if they leave early. Also, those new joiners, since 2015, will not have the early pension benefits many enjoyed around 16/18/22 years of service. But even then, it’s pretty damn good!


​​​​​​​
Oh, as this thread is likely triggered by Nurses, Rail and Border Force strikes. The health workers had a pay offer in Jul 22 that ranged from 4-9.1%, where the highest went to the lowest paid. For Nurses, in Band 5 and 6, they got around 5.5%, plus they have pay increments of around 3% and promotion to Band 6 brings more too. So with annual inflation at around 8% they are probably ‘break even’. No I don’t have sympathy one jot - the economy is nadgered - and they are being hung out to dry by the Unions that are desperately trying to destabilise the current Government to get their puppets (aka Labour Party) into power. Don’t forget that a lot of Labour’s funding comes from the Unions. The biggest losers will be the strikers who will not be properly paid and probably not gain as much as they will lose. I am also not sticking up for Truss and Kamikwase who spaffed a load of money up the wall either. But right now, a series of strikes is the last thing that this country and its people need. Lowering GDP will lead to poor pay settlements next year for all too.
Rant mode off…

LJ
 

You know I have a lot of time for your common sense and loyal approach but trying to paint the last 20 years as 12 wins vs 8 losses makes you sound like a politician. Do the simple maths and it works out as a 1.89% loss when you add them up. That’s before you factor in a probable 6-7% loss for this year.

I know it is more complicated than that but trying to spin the last 20 years as anything other than a real terms loss does not do you any favours. The only reason I didn’t feel the pain financially was because my overseas jobs boosted my pay and I was PAS which gave me an annual increment. Others were potentially far worse off than I was.

So, basically, if you joined to fly and not chase promotion then currently you have no reason to stay beyond your minimum return of service. In fact, increasingly, you will look like a fool for doing so. Maybe that is the employment model the RAF is really after.

I know the AFPRB is hamstrung by many factors but right now they seem like a total waste of time and money. The money spent on their existence would be better spent on a pay rise for the military or some heating engineers.

As I said many times, I can only speak for my own area of expertise, but money IS the answer despite what the MOD want us to believe. A proper payrise and/or a dramatic improval in standard of living is the only way to stop the rot. Otherwise you’ll have an Air Force (sorry I can’t speak for the Army or Navy) full of very junior aircrew waiting to complete their RoS before they leave and a bunch of non-aircrew trades who think the RAF exists to provide them with employment rather than with the delivery of air power.

BV

BV

But you’re not factoring in the fact that the country has been through a lot of dwang in the past 10-14 years - financial crashes, mismanagement by Lab/Con/Lib Governments, a once in a generation global pandemic, a significant war in mainland Europe, BREXIT (a minor but not insignificant problem compared to the rest) and then the vagaries of no less than 3 defence reviews in that time. Do you really think that we would be seriously significantly better off after all of that? :sad: At best we could only hope for a modest improvement (which I believe we have).

Also, there has been significant change in how we’re all paid - you mentioned PAS, which came in 2003, but other things changed too (PAY16, RRP(F) changes, lump sums and timed promotion changes). They all make a significant change when you look at those,

There is another comparator as all of the pay reviews are available. So let’s look at a 15 year Flt Lt on flying pay in 2004 versus one in 2022 (18 years apart).

In 2004 it took 3.5 years for a graduate to get to Flt Lt (5.5 years for a non-grad) and so after 15 years they would be top level 9 Flt Lt in year 13 which paid £37,883 pa plus they would have gone to Initial Rate after passing their OCU. In those days a jet-jockey like yourself would be through the OCU by around 4 years. So initial rate year 4, middle rate year 8 and top rate year 12. So in year 15 they would be on top rate flying pay of £31.87 a day. That is £11,632 pa plus £37,883 - total £49,515 pa. If they stayed a Flt Lt and wanted to stay in they would be boarded for PAS by 16/38.

Now in 2022 it takes everyone 2.5 years to get to Flt Lt and so they will be top level OF2-8 of £52,868 pa by year 15. Their basic annual pay up to that point will be better than their 2004 predecessor on annual basis too. Now, things haven’t been going so well for this character in flying training and it has taken 6 years to get post OCU, but luckily they transition to the new RRP(F) at OCU+6 having been paid 4 years of Initial Rate and 2 years of Middle Rate on the legacy scheme before jumping onto Tier 2 Rate 1 in year 12 and by year 13 they are on Tier 2 Rate 3 paying £50.66 a day or £18,490 pa. Add the Main Pay and RRP(F) then you get £71,358. Also, at OCU+7 they can take a £70k one-off lump sum or wait until 1 Apr 23 and take the first of 2x £40k lump sums. Access to PAS is now at 20/40 for most given then new pension schemes.

Now using the Bank of England inflation calculator then 2004’s £49,515 is worth roughly £77,665 in Apr 22, about £6k more than the 2022 Flt Lt. That is the very basic calculation that you are doing, which does not take into account the earlier promotion to Flt Lt (3 years earlier for non-grads!), the access to larger amounts of RRP(F) over several years and the lump sums. Even if you do a basic £70k divided by the 6 year return of service then you get £11.5k more than the 2004 Flt Lt per year, less the inflation makes it £5.5k better off. The 2022 Flt Lt is most definitely better off, in so-called “real terms”, than the 2004 Flt Lt, when you add it all up. That’s even whilst we’re in the dwang financially as I mentioned previously.

However, I do agree that the overall “offer” is poorer due to the erosion of the standards in Mess accommodation, SFA, food, medical provision, fun factor, lack of HR support, opportunity, working day hours and the feeling of pride, Paying people more money will never fix that, in fact it could make some things much worse! Which is why I standby my comment that pay is not the answer, but just a small element of it - I know that personally when I took a pay cut to improve my own quality of life. So I fully agree “a dramatic improval in standard of living is the only way to stop the rot” but I think we need to be careful giving the new bods an accurate picture of where they are financially rather than the slightly over-simplified view of %ge pay rises versus inflation (which I think we agree on too?).

LJ

PS. I should add that very few stay flying fast and pointy types past age 50. The odd exceptions to 55, and now the Ton and 2-seat Tonka have gone then I can’t see more getting to 55 and only fewer. The same goes for Rotary, as it knackers your neck over time. So then you have a slow trickle to UAS and MFTS roles, or a MEXO to Air Mobility or ISTAR. But that is not many either. So, yes, you can stay flying but normally age catches up (medically or performance wise or frankly you’ve had enough and can’t be arsed with 0630 met briefs anymore!) and so many commission or promote in their later years where their brains (full of 20-30 years of flying stuff) are more useful than keeping them plugging along in a cockpit of some sort - especially if they have to re-invent themselves, what do they say about “old dogs and new tricks?”. It was ever thus, ever since Pontius was a Pilot (Sp.). :}

LJ
 

You know I agree with alot of what you say but please consider this:

UK average house price in 2004 £150,000
UK average house price in 2022 £295,000

Flt Lt pilot salary in 2004 £49,500
Flt Lt pilot salary in 2022 £77,500 (your numbers)

That means that the Flt Lt in 2004 could buy the average house with three times their salary. In 2022 it takes almost four times their salary.

Many of those Flt Lt pilots now live in parts of the UK where the average house costs a hell of a lot more than that. I think the hierarchy of the RAF have forgotten that their life lived in a nice house in a nice part of the country is not the life that the current crop of pilots will ever live. And that is why they all head East.

I know the AFPRB can’t fix that but a little bit of honesty and acceptance of facts would go at least part of the way to acknowledging the problem.

BV