Afghan LOA

[Don Key]

No, they are not signed up to the QA system, hence, we MUST all use the disciplinary system to deal with their incompetence/negligence. It is the only way!

Southblue, lets see how well disposed you are to the shiney trade when they take the lot back in one go, then spend between 6 months and a year getting your pay wrong and you have to spend half your life on the phone to some inept little pen pusher who will tell you it is all somebody else's fault.....

 

[Dazzy26]

A bit off topic, but there has just been an external audit of JPA inputs for attachments at our place and they found so many errors they have now gone back 2 years, folks are getting deductions from their wages for over payments. Its all down to incorrect inputs being put into JPA by the admin staff, such as starting people on LOA, but not stopping their home to duty (or whatever they have renamed it this year!). People going on courses and living in. but not having home to duty stoppedDT_Xtremez_42:. Admin staff knew every individual affected but did not have the guts to let them know in advance, guys and gals have found out on their latest pay chits that they have been deducted.

 

[Don Key]

Put the wrong fluid in a system, leave something loose, assemble a component incorrectly - We all know what happens.

If a shiney gets it wrong everyone else pays the price. It is about time shineys started getting fined the equivalent amount when they get it wrong, after all, they are getting paid enough now!

 

[s1mtech]

I believe in the not to distant future HFMEMS will include the shineys, answers have to be given then after an investigation.

This system actually works at Kinloss!!
We have put so many in and are getting answers and things changed.

The engineering will soon drop off it to include everyone.

 

[Dazzy26]

I believe in the not to distant future HFMEMS will include the shineys, answers have to be given then after an investigation.

This system actually works at Kinloss!!
We have put so many in and are getting answers and things changed.

The engineering will soon drop off it to include everyone.

It's already in the process of happening according to a Flt Safety visit we had this week. It'a called DAEMS (DA being Defence Aviation). Then things will become interesting!!DT_Xtremez_32:

 

[craig1991]

Been to Afghan recently? Received LOA? Sure you were entitled?

Was shown a briefing notice on an RAF intranet news page today. Lots of people have been given LOA while in Afghan, as there is a DWP (Deployed Welfare Package) in place they were not entitled.

The RAF have now decided to recover all of this money. The largest individual debt being over £16,000. They are even looking into the possibility of debt recovery action from ex-service personnel, seriously? I had to laugh at the idiot who had decided this might be an "emotive issue". Methinks this is an understatement.

My point is that surely as an individual has no control over the payment of LOA, it's switched on and off by adminers, why should the claimant be held responsible for this and forced to repay a sizable amount of money.

Also will any action be taken against the admin staff who have made this gargantuan cock-up, while they still maintain they deserve the higher pay band!

Finally, if the adminers use the "confusing rules" excuse what chance do the rest of us have????

completly agree it is not there mistake and if the admin people make the mess up they should be the ones paying it back and not the service staffDT_Xtremez_21:

 

[craig1991]

Put the wrong fluid in a system, leave something loose, assemble a component incorrectly - We all know what happens.

If a shiney gets it wrong everyone else pays the price. It is about time shineys started getting fined the equivalent amount when they get it wrong, after all, they are getting paid enough now!

people who cock up should pay the price and not the rest of you

 

[busby1971]

The price of this cock up

The price of this cock up

Okay admin pay the cost of this cock up.

LOA ISSUED = £100 (just a sum to make it happen)
LOA RECOVERED = £100

Total cost to the Service of the cock up = £0.00, the RAF don't charge interest but they don't pay it either.

Even SACs on low pay band can afford that.

By the way, what was it supposed to be when the shiney said that this is only way to get in/on the system? Because if you were due something else this might offset the pain.

 

[Don Key]

I think youve missed the point somewhat. It isn't the cost in £sd that is the issue, it is the fact that people will be messed about from here to christmas because their pay will be buggered up by the same shineys that made the mistake in the first place. I never said that they should pay for the cost of the cock-up, I said they should be fined by the same amount as the cock-up.

Overpayment - £100
Recovery - £100
Fine to Shiney - £100

Put the fines in the CO's fund or something or split it 50/50 between the unlucky person who will be getting messed about. The impotant thing is

shiney learns that cock-up = financial pain

That will stop it happening in seconds flat!

 

[rest have risen above me]

Okay admin pay the cost of this cock up.

LOA ISSUED = £100 (just a sum to make it happen)
LOA RECOVERED = £100

Total cost to the Service of the cock up = £0.00, the RAF don't charge interest but they don't pay it either.

Even SACs on low pay band can afford that.

By the way, what was it supposed to be when the shiney said that this is only way to get in/on the system? Because if you were due something else this might offset the pain.

I'm quite happy with it being paid back in full..It's public money so it should be...but when there is very little flexibility in repaying the cash then I get a monk on.
People received it in good faith so it isn't their fault that they've bought an x box or chinese with it. Now PSF want to take wedges out quickly and 4 days gross pay of a lower than low SAC is £200 approx. As a SNCO 200 notes needs to be budgeted for.... an SAC must be bricking it.

 

[RAF Bird]

I half agree mate.... if I had been paid LOA, gone to PSF and questioned it and they still said I'm entitled to it so I spend it. If then say 6 months on they decide I am not entitled to it (for arguments sake we'll say it was 6.30 a day for 123 days is £774.90) For me I think I'd roughly have to pay back £260 a month so that would be over 3 months. I simply couldn't afford that and why should I. I didn't do the pay run... I have queried it. Get the bugger who over paid me to pay back the money to public funds.

 

[Dazzy26]

A question then: When an adminer inputs your attachement on to JPA, does it record their information as having logged in to your records and updated it? Surely if it does then that provides an audit trail for any appeal? Anybody know the answer?

 

[Humble Scribe]

I'm not saying that I don't agree with your points of view here but there is an appeals process. If you received the LOA in good faith and queried it with SAC Shiney-Arse, who said that it's yours go out & spend it, then subsequently found out you had to pay it back, you received the money in good faith and have legitimate grounds for appeal.

If you received LOA and, as a SAC just spent it thinking that you may or may not be caught out, can't afford the repayment you also have a legitimate appeal to have the monthly recovery reduced.

Now not predicting the outcome of either appeal but there's nothing surer to p!ss you Chf Clk off than him having to write half a dozen or so appeals due to his clerks (apparently) c0cking up. SAC Shiney-Arse soon learns the errors of his ways!

 

[Humble Scribe]

A question then: When an adminer inputs your attachement on to JPA, does it record their information as having logged in to your records and updated it? Surely if it does then that provides an audit trail for any appeal? Anybody know the answer?

LOA is credited through the Arrivals Clerk actor & I've not seen a record of who has actioned what in there. Under HR Administrator yes you can identify who has actioned something to your record.

 

[johnny99]

slightly off topic.....but a couple of years back..... i noticed on my pay statement that i was a few hundred short and that i owed about 4 grand.... shocked... f**k yeah ...

It turned out that they'd suddenly decided to bill me for not paying my quarter rent for the last 15 months despite the fact i'd moved into my own home 15 months previous....

A simple mistake and easily resolved between myself the adminers and dhe....

No problem ...and i said so what happens, you clear the debt and pay me back next month the 4 days salary you took from me this month.....

No .... Unfortunately it doesn't work like that we have to pay you 6000 or so next month and then we reclaim 4 days pay for the next however months till you've paid it off.... talk about arse about face ...

Not really a problem cause i banked it and earnt interest ... but some foolish version of myself 20 years ago would of blown it on crap that i didn't need and then gone short for the next year..... just seems daft

 

[billy bob]

LOA Shambles

LOA Shambles

I've just been called in and told to pay back £500 of LOA from over 3 years ago even though I never received the deployed welfare package apart from the free washing. The worst bit though is they have asked me if I have a receipt for not receiving the welfare package! Now how many people do you know have a receipt for something they don't get. This may make appealing difficult I fear.

 

[Woodja]

LOA is credited through the Arrivals Clerk actor & I've not seen a record of who has actioned what in there. Under HR Administrator yes you can identify who has actioned something to your record.

You can use the View Entries under Arrivals Clerk to see who has actioned what to the pay account - same as the Entry History under HR Administrator but a lot slower (you can look at everyone you can see under the Arrival Clerk actor rather than just those you have admin responsibility for).

 

[Oberon305]

I've just found out I owe £280 from one of my tours (no idea which one?). I must admit that I just presumed that I was entitled to that as well as the Op Allowance. My bad I admit, but why was i paid it in the first place?

The previous entries about shineys being accountable are true. They are supposedly the subject matter 'experts', so I shouldn't have received it in the first place. Hardly my fault is it.

I know I owe it back, just miffed about the whole thing.DT_Xtremez_25:

 

[ICATQ]

I've just found out I owe £280 from one of my tours (no idea which one?). I must admit that I just presumed that I was entitled to that as well as the Op Allowance. My bad I admit, but why was i paid it in the first place?

The previous entries about shineys being accountable are true. They are supposedly the subject matter 'experts', so I shouldn't have received it in the first place. Hardly my fault is it.

I know I owe it back, just miffed about the whole thing.DT_Xtremez_25:

I was paid TWO Op Allowances, one from the HR bods in theatre, and another one from the HR at my Unit, despite me telling them and emailing them that I had already actioned payment of the allowance.

As I wasnt allowed to pay it back in a lump I stashed it in my ISA and then paid it back over 9 months, final payment 11 months after I got back.

Still a pain in the ar$e.

 

[J A F F A]

Links

Links

Anybody who has intranet access can view the specialist support letters in the A1 Spec Spt website. Check under non scrolling news and there are 2 spec spt letters with respect to LOA payments.

All Chf Clks now have a list of personnel who have received eroneous payments and, if you believe you are one of the unlucky individuals, you should contact them if they have not made contact with you already.

Chf Clks have been advised that personnel should be encouraged to appeal, thereby ensuring that monies are not recovered immediately and providing respite to garner evidence or to investigate claims.

The age old argument about administrators not getting 'techie charges' for their mistakes is an emotive one; unsurprisingly these arguments have become more common since we were placed into the higher pay band. As an administrator of some 17 years, I have worked with some truely guff clerks and I can quite understand why the technical trades get annnoyed when their pay statements are incorrect. However, as annoying as having incorrect pay is, I do not think that this can be comapared to a technical mistake which can have life theatning consequences.

That said, I do believe that too many clerks get away with poor administration. JPA provides a very easy way to see who has actioned an input and, if a clerk makes an error that results in mistakes to an individual(s) pay then they should have minor admin action taken against them. These are the strong management decisions those of us now on the higher pay band should now be taking to ensure that future clerks are professional and that they provide the service that a lot of PSFs have failed to give for too long.