AFCO duties - No AV SNCO's need apply!

[Chad Norman]

Not really my scene anymore but was quite shocked to find out that
AV SNCO's are being excluded (again) from applying for Sgt AFCO jobs (latest volunteers list).

I knew we were in a mess with AV manning a couple of years back but still?

At least ACOS Manning are making us aware in the form of a note attached to the vacancy.

Any admin types care to outline what is happening to TG1 manning? We haven't had a published FMDL now since, well quite a while.


Regards

Chad

 

[busby1971]

Not Just Fairies

Not Just Fairies

Not really my scene anymore but was quite shocked to find out that
AV SNCO's are being excluded (again) from applying for Sgt AFCO jobs (latest volunteers list).

I knew we were in a mess with AV manning a couple of years back but still?

At least ACOS Manning are making us aware in the form of a note attached to the vacancy.

Any admin types care to outline what is happening to TG1 manning? We haven't had a published FMDL now since, well quite a while.


Regards

Chad

Quite a few of the AV SNCOs in the Field Force have been called back to trade early, and a lot of uplift posts have been filling non uplift posts as they become vacant to stay in recruiting. I would have thought that quite a few other trades might struggle to get released to out off trade duties including AFCO land, at the moment.

I think we will all know more once the SDSR goes through...

 

[Chad Norman]

Fair enough Busby,

It's actually nice of ACOS to let our trade know we don't have a chance in the advert! At least expectations of variety can stay where they belong, very low.

I wonder if any ATM SNCO's will be in with a shout either, probably not.

Chad

 

[muttywhitedog]

An ATM SNCO at our place tried for an AFCO job a couple of months ago and it never got off the ground as there are too many in out of trade jobs at the moment.

 

[welshjpc]

Nothing to do with fairy SNECs being wierdos then, scaring the general public..... DT_Xtremez_14:

 

[Joe_90]

Chad, AV tradesmen have been getting recalled back into trade before the end of their tours at the moment, along with some other trades. It's going to be a field force of nothing but suppliers and clerks soon.DT_Xtremez_42:

 

[Reformed Scribbly]

Don't forget MTDs, I seem to recall the letter from ACOS Manning dragging people back said we could have plenty of those in return.

 

[Oberon305]

FMDL was at 83% when I applied for an out-of trade post recently, which funnily enough is the percentage quoted to me when I applied for the same job 2 years ago....so it's good to see they've been addressing it since then!!!!

I mentioned that they should stop advertising 'Any Trade' if we were excluded and quoted 'discrimination' which didn't go down too well!!!

But.......at least they've started adding notes to the vacancy posts informing us not to bother, so it's a start!

 

[Soon To Leave]

Wouldn't surprise me if they are going to have a recruitment drive for AMMs and they don't want us to put them off with the truth!

 

[MrMasher]

At long last we have the FMDL for A Tech M (no AV yet) on the ACOS website:

Sep 10 98%
Oct 10 102%
Nov 10 99%

So why is it that in some of the "any trade" jobs in the trawls does it say in the job description box no A Tech M?

We are obviously at a good level according to the FMDL so why can't we spare a handful for out of trade jobs?

Are we bracing ourselves for massive cuts?

 

[Weebl]

At long last we have the FMDL for A Tech M (no AV yet) on the ACOS website:

Sep 10 98%
Oct 10 102%
Nov 10 99%

So why is it that in some of the "any trade" jobs in the trawls does it say in the job description box no A Tech M?

We are obviously at a good level according to the FMDL so why can't we spare a handful for out of trade jobs?

Are we bracing ourselves for massive cuts?

Those numbers mean nothing when they use figures like my Sqn being 120% manned, while a manpower review has us 51 Technicians short. This was a few years ago and we have lost more Techies since then, some of whom have been replaced by AMMs.

No, strangely enough we did not get more people posted in, I wonder how long (in minutes) it would have taken to rectify the manpower stats if we had even one person more than the manpower review decided we should have.

Fortunately to rectify this after the couple of years since the last one they have finally realised we are struggling, so we are going to have a manpower review. Perhaps the plan is to keep having them until they get numbers that suit?