I see that the RAF offers apprenticeships in many trades -- my father's old one, airframe fitter, starts at £25k and can rise to £40k if promoted to Corporal. How this compares to civvy street I don't know, certainly the RAF would need to match civvy rates if it wants to retain its experienced engineers. Having grown up in the quality MQs of t he 1940s and 50s I am shocked at the state of so much military accommodation, surely this has to deter anyone from making a career in the RAF or any Service come to that. Maybe not just the engineers are undervalued.

I would suggest that corporal is the equivalent of a licensed engineer. That is someone who signs for his own work and that of others. In commercial aviation airline/offshore helicopters that would probably bring in £60 plus.
Apprentices were being paid £25k 15 years ago with a further pay rise when they went to mechanic.!!!!!
Another issue is rate of time to promotion.
Cannot speak for whay happens today but at one time promotion to corporal in the air force was slow and to sergeant was dead mans shoes.
Army promotion was about 2 years to corporal and another 3 to sergeant.
Hence at one point quite a few RAF corporals transferred to the army. Couple of courses and promoted sergeant.
Working for a UK major airline I was on about £52k 18 years ago.

Today Trainee mech about £30k, mech about 40k to 50K, LAE about 70k plus. That’s roughly what you get.

Thanks for all the info, I suppose this thread title says it all as far as the political masters of the RAF are concerned: Undervalued Engineers. My poor old Dad must be turning in his grave. The Labour crowd are said to be planning £17m of defence cuts, Putin sees continued conquest on the Trump return to power, while the MidEast cauldron is furiously boiling. Yesterday The Times reported on a survey revealing that one in ten of Generation Z don't know how to change a light bulb, one in five won't go up a stepladder because it may be dangerous, and almost half of them cannot identify car components such as the alternator. Sunday Times ran a feature on how to use an electric drill. Heaven help us.

ericferret wrote (inter alia:)
I don't know what period Eric is referring to. As a direct entry fitter fairy in the 1960s, signing on for 9 years service (the minimum period for highest pay scale) I was a Corporal in less than 4 years from attestation and a Sergeant less than 8 years, completing my last 18 months service as an SNCO. Trade promotion was automatic if one passed the necessary exams and had at least average assessments. Although normal practice was to move one on promotion to Sergeant (if only to a different Squadron on the same station) I was left where I was, as I was effectively running the section for large periods of time anyway.

Just a small point re the underlined above. When the RAF had 22 trade groups, this was indeed the case for non technical trades, although as an aside, why Safety Equip were classed as such was an insult, but not so for technical trades and there was a pay disparity between both groups.

The RAF however have never had a satisfactory promotion chain / progression for airmen. The so called "time promotion" produced a surplus of C/T's for example, so the answer from " manning " , or zimmer frame central, was to insist on assessments being raised to unheard of numbers and "Spec Reps ". even then it was the luck of the draw. Not forgetting the RAF had an obsession for many years with "single trades"....A & C being the normal in civilian life of course.

The pay issue became prominent at the end of the 70's / early 80's when " manning " woke up one day and realised there was an excessive amount of PVR's being submitted.

There has always been a disparity between civil military maintenance providers, from the past Airworks being the most obvious, but who made up the difference with enhancements for things like towing or keys. Clearly, that disparity mindset remains if they are reluctant to pay the going rate(s) for LAE's.

The current RAF apprenticeship bears no resemblance to the past. The basic AMM course provides enough training to ensure they are safe when they become productive....the SAC(Tech) course does go into slightly more depth, but nowhere near the levels many on here would have experienced. As for promotion to Cpl, possible, but again, much depends on how involved they become with secondary / tertiary duties.

The military will never rival civilian pay scales, but, will continue with the "30 days leave / accom / dental and medical treatment / adventure training" to try and compensate as an attraction to joining.

I’m an ex RAF aircraft engineer (A Tech AV) and would like to add my thoughts and experiences. Hopefully some policy maker will read and learn why theres a shortage of Engineers…

It’s a retention issue not just a recruitment issue.

The problem with aircraft engineering is how long it takes to for someone to become suitably qualified and experienced (SQEP). You can’t simply replace an engineer with 22 years experience with a kid who’s fresh out of school. It takes years to gain the knowledge for fault finding and the knacks of what to do when things inevitably don’t go to plan.

RAF Trade Training now seems to be ran by the accountants. By having the recruits in the training pipeline for the bare minimum amount of time. The training has got so cut back that the system is now kicking the can down the road. Recruits are turning upto a frontline squadron knowing nothing, without being taught any flight line operations. So frontline squadrons are now expected to teach their new arrivals what was originally taught at Cosford.

From what I’ve seen. The RAF changed in pension scheme, so the new guys joining now don’t get awarded an immediate pension if they were to stay in for 22 years. They only get a pension at 65 regardless of how long they serve. So there’s no longer any retention incentive, such as the “pension trap”.

The PVR rate is not just about the money, but the conditions in the RAF compared to having a civilian job instead. In my own opinion Junior Ranks in the RAF are treated poorly, patronised and talked down to. There’s still a Victorian class-system culture, where Junior Ranks are treated like second class citizens. I can’t think of any civilian job where I’d be told where I can and can’t live or eat.

On recent OOAs we’d be living in transit accommodation that’s literally not fit for a prisoner and deliberately provided with the worse food that PAYD could get away with. My thoughts were a civilian would never accept this back home and have a much higher quality of life.

“That’s life in a blue suit” … but we did not join to be worse off than the alternative careers that we could have had.

The retention posters that say we should stay in the RAF for the adventure training and dental care, but don’t see the bigger picture. On a undermanned and busy frontline squadron, it’s very difficult to get time off work to attend sport and AT. The dental care is no better than civilian life if you’re waiting months for an appointment with the med centre.

From what I’ve experienced working alongside a big name civilian aerospace company. They’re no alternative to RAF manpower. As this civilian company is entirely driven by profit. They won’t touch anything that won’t make them money. For example, if they’re contracted to fix 8 widgets a month then the RAF will only be getting 8 widgets and no more, regardless of how many are sat on the shelf U/S

Well said, I couldn't agree more. My father was making similar comments, particularly the class structure, when he left the RAF in 1962.

I suspect he's talking about the 1990s. Frontline First/Options for Change and the peace dividend meant promotions from Cpl to Sgt were few and far between.

Does Line Training at Cosford not exist anymore? I taught there in the early 00s and I always thought it was outdated and badly focussed even then. All we produced was people who could carry out a 4-man servicing on a 1950s training aircraft. We had a visit from some sqn training cells, who told us that mechs arriving on the sqns insisted they hadn't received the training that they absolutely had. The trainers were shocked to see all the training objectives that were printed on the back of the training certificates! Also, the AMMs (at the time) were not being used to their fullest extent when they got to the sqns. Most were just used as lineys with no trade experience being given, even though the Mechs and AVs had first sig in both trades.

I fell foul of the 1990 Options for Change cull. I was coming to the end of a 13 year stretch and was offered an extension to 22yrs (age 40). At the time I was a JNCO and "Q'd" on Harriers and Sea Kings, the seven year extension came with the caveat that I could not expect any promotion. Ummmm, let me think about........., where's the door? I left, retrained as a merchant marine engineer and continued my engineering odyssey elsewhere culminating in a Senior Superintendents post broadly comparable to that of OC Eng Wing.
Engineers, sons of Martha, will always play second fiddle to the captain but a ship could not sail without their input, skill, and team leadership. In my experience when the chips are down it is often the calm reassurance of the Chief that enables the captain to make the necessary decisions.
The amount of continuous professional development required to stay on top as an engineer is quite demanding and does warrant a little more respect. I'm surprised that this is not the case with the RAF seeing as the CAS is an engineer?

If RAF leaders were still promoted on the ability to deliver operational effect, engineers would be more valued. As a member of the aircrew fraternity I had the deepest respect for my spanner wielding colleagues at Odiham, and we all worked and played well together because we understood each others contribution (there were exceptions on both sides, but they were the exception and broadly detested by all) . Today's leaders have a completely different set of deliverables, and that consigns engineers (and personnel in general) to line items on a spreadsheet.

I feel for the engineering trades, they will always have my respect. But LAME's on the outside are respected - I'll just put that out there.....

Defence cuts by Tories in real terms has be way more.

Part of the problem in the UK is in the language. In Europe a qualified Engineer often has a title prefix similar (in status) to a doctor, whereas most Brits see the holder of a spanner as an engineer and thus expect to treat and pay engineers accordingly.

Forgive the cut'n'paste, but Google tells that:

Engineers design, build, and maintain systems and structures, while mechanics repair and maintain machines and vehicles.

Design and creation

• Engineers: Design, analyse, and build systems and structures, such as vehicles, machines, and processes. They also oversee construction projects and run quality control tests.
• Mechanics: Repair, maintain, and troubleshoot machines and vehicles. They also perform routine maintenance and assemble mechanical components.

Work environment

• Engineers: Work in offices, laboratories, industrial plants, construction sites, and oil and gas exploration and production sites.

• Mechanics: Work in cramped spaces, such as inside vehicles, and are often exposed to contaminants like antifreeze and degreasers. They almost always wear protective gear.

Education

• Engineers: Usually have a university degree with a strong understanding of math, physics, and design.

Specialties

• Mechanics: May specialize in a particular type of machine, such as cars, tractors, or heavy machinery.

Even EASA dumbed it down, the Old CAA section L licence holder has Aircraft Engineers Licence on the cover, but the EASA one changed it to Aircraft Maintenance Licence, thus at a stroke of a pen they dumbed down the qualification.

Remember the late 70’s when the RAF had a glut of Chief Techs, so they offered them incentives to leave, all the good, highly skilled, and motivated folks who knew they would do well out in the wide world left, and what remained was sadly pitiful.


..

I do remember that redundancy round. I was at Wildenrath on 3(F) and we lost the best Chief on the Sqn. I recall being baffled by the policy.

Historically any voluntary redundancy scheme the RAF has run, for whatever branch/trade, has seen many of the best, most capable, people leave - and the dead wood stay.

It also tends to lead to a short term uptick in the PVR rate - as individuals who applied for voluntary redundancy but didn't get it elect to leave anyway, as they have already mentally made the transition to civilian life, with the support of their wife/family.

Ironically enough, the increase in PVRs after a voluntary redundancy round has in the past lead to a shortage in the very branch/trade which had literally just been in surplus!!

In the civil world, licensed aircraft maintenance engineers, are treated with respect, and receive remuneration commensurate with the level of their certification privileges.

Starting pay for B1/B2 engineers, with a couple of type ratings with Jet2 is north of 100k. Wages do vary, with the U.K. median being around 60k.
The engineer title used by licensed aircraft engineers, is specific to them, due to the level of their certification privileges, and must meet the recognised ICAO standard.

Thanks wotpb, I'm so glad to hear this. I was proud to hold the LAME licence and valued it more than my PPL/IR, maybe because I had to work so bloody hard to get it. All credit to the LAMEs out there, they deserve the respect you mention as well as the salary to honour it. I've long given up on the "engineer" who arrives to fix the washing machine, hook up the telephone wires, install the gas boiler etc etc.
My other regret is that the RAF or maybe its senior officers doesn't appear to follow the above precepts, and as for politicians ...

Ericferret, I would say that a LAME is higher than that of a Corporal, a Corporal cannot I believe be a Camo and renew an ARC, that would be a Wing Commander normally in the RAF.