Welcome to E-Goat :: The Totally Unofficial Royal Air Force Rumour Network
Join our free community to unlock a range of benefits like:
  • Post and participate in discussions.
  • Send and receive private messages with other members.
  • Respond to polls and surveys.
  • Upload and share content.
  • Gain access to exclusive features and tools.
Join 7.5K others today

AIP mispayment

  • Following weeks of work, the E-GOAT team are delighted to present to you a new look to the forums with plenty of new features. Take a look around and see what you think!
Trending This Week
View More Trending

AIP mispayment

  • 0-250

    Votes: 21 45.7%

  • 251-500

    Votes: 4 8.7%

  • 501-1000

    Votes: 3 6.5%

  • 1001-1500

    Votes: 4 8.7%

  • 1501-2000

    Votes: 2 4.3%

  • 2001-2500

    Votes: 1 2.2%

  • 2501-3000

    Votes: 1 2.2%

  • 3001-4000

    Votes: 3 6.5%

  • 4001-5000

    Votes: 1 2.2%

  • 5001+ (Ouch!)

    Votes: 6 13.0%
  • Total voters
    46
NVQ AIP Award failure

NVQ AIP Award failure

I have just had the honour of having nearly £1500 deducted from my wage due to the Q-PI-D award mistake. Has anyone else had this problem. I am not sure as to the legallity of the whole thing but would suggest that something is not quite right with what they are doing.
 
JSP 752 Pay and allowances and JSP 754 reference pay and charges I think may help. They shouldn't be able to deduct more than 4 days pay from your wages I'm sure for a start. PSF or BSF or whatever it's called at your unit should be the people to see.

Did you get a chance to appeal against the decision?

And were you forewarned about the money being deducted?

Chief Clerk is the man to see in this scenario for the latest up to date JSP/JPAC advice!
 
I was under the impression that everything was on hold until a way forward had been agreed at Ministerial level. As a cavaet to that you will be lowered to the increment level you should be on as there is no doubt that you were not entitled to be on the higher level (Whoever is to blame) i.e. the AIP was input incorrectly according to the JSP is this the £1500 you're on about as in going from level 7 to 6? As said if monies have been taken off you wrt the whole amount they say you owe then it shouldn't have been that much in one go. I would speak to the Chief Clerk ASAP.
 
RAF Wide AIP Review

RAF Wide AIP Review

A mate has told me that following the debacle of the TG4 AIP issue that the powers that be have started a RAF wide check....stand by for questions and copies of quals not to mention an overpayment recovery!!

Anyone else heard this? :PDT_Xtremez_06:
 
Not something to bother me I haven't been able to use any since the RAF wouldn't let me use the Qualifications they gave me after they moved the goalposts.
 
So at least the powers that be have initiated an RAF wide review of all AIP's now!

I wonder how many others will be caught out.....
 
Just heard of a TG1 mate who has been affected by this.

His AIP was awarded at Odiham.

Anyone here been collared? I was lucky, I had all my AIP requests denied... so they ain't got anything on me!

HTB
 
Out of the 150 or so audits I have conducted, about 10% have discrepancies. Five have no certificates in their blue file to substantiate the claim (shouldnt be a problem to the individuals as copies were only ever provided). Of the remaining 10 or so, 6 have debts due to incorrect backdating by HR, 3 have credits due to HR not backdating when they should, and one has a Q-PI-D on record for an NVQ L3, which shouldnt have been awarded as Q-PI-D's are for Level 4 and above.

Two of the 6 have appealed on the grounds that they were unaware of the rules - I told them that ignorance is no excuse, but they insisted on having their say. The first one has been returned to unit already with the "tough sh!t" stamp attached.
 
It doesn't affect me but I think it's absolute bollocks and another reason to think, 'Hmmmm.....might be time to pull that yellow and black handle!'.

The biggest thing I disagree with is the AIP's submitted in good faith and it is the 'AIP Checkers' or whatever they have called themselves in the past who should be held to account. On the other hand, I have heard from a TG17 bod who is doing the Unit wide check here, of a number of individuals who have either:

1. Submitted 3 AIP's successfully.

2. Submitted an AIP for the same Qual twice successfully.

They should get hammered as they've gone out of their way to cheat the system.
 
muttywhitedog said:
One has a Q-PI-D on record for an NVQ L3, which shouldnt have been awarded as Q-PI-D's are for Level 4 and above.
Click to expand...

Thats probably me..

My AIP was submitted for the Q-PI-B, though it had pay increment issues so they (PSF) simply changed it to Q-PI-D to see what it did. Would have to check the JPA awards to be 100% sure if they changed it back.
 
dunno

dunno

I thought D was the any rank one?
Maybe there was a higher level. i was saving it till I got promoted.....never happened. ha ha so no worries for me!
 
Not me guv..

It was PSF honestly...

I supplied -

a) AIP Application form completed correctly.
b) A copy of the JSP stating which award could be used for what claim
c) A copy of the award certificate
 
Fairynotleckie said:
Not me guv..

It was PSF honestly...

I supplied -

a) AIP Application form completed correctly.
b) A copy of the JSP stating which award could be used for what claim
c) A copy of the award certificate
Click to expand...

And it still doesn't guarantee you from having to pay anything back.
 
Kingpin said:
And it still doesn't guarantee you from having to pay anything back.
Click to expand...

If the guy has supplied the appropriate evidence and it is in line with the JSP then it will be fine. However if some numpty of a clerk has uttered the words 'it looks ok' or similar I would be worried!

However, if an individual has provided all the bits and pieces I would expect him/her to have made sure it was an appropriate qual before submitting otherwise they are as much to blame as the wallies in PSF.
 
clungemobile said:
If the guy has supplied the appropriate evidence and it is in line with the JSP then it will be fine. However if some numpty of a clerk has uttered the words 'it looks ok' or similar I would be worried!

However, if an individual has provided all the bits and pieces I would expect him/her to have made sure it was an appropriate qual before submitting otherwise they are as much to blame as the wallies in PSF.
Click to expand...

But if the paperwork complied with the rules at the time it is neither the Wally in PSF's fault nor the individual. What I'm getting here is lets backdate a goalpost change. Now that's not fair
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top