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.
Trending
This Week
View More Trending
me too
me too
Same here....there was some weird rules, I think you could use the IMLC one at the time but only if you were a CPL. Think the BTEC could only be used at JT level, not CPL.
There was some weird sliding scale of level of qual for each rank.
There was a lot of confusion at the time about backdating too and when your IDD was and if that got backdated.
maybe that is the issue now.
me too
Same here....there was some weird rules, I think you could use the IMLC one at the time but only if you were a CPL. Think the BTEC could only be used at JT level, not CPL.
There was some weird sliding scale of level of qual for each rank.
There was a lot of confusion at the time about backdating too and when your IDD was and if that got backdated.
maybe that is the issue now.
I Look Like Kevin Costner
Grand Prix fanatic..
- 3,836
- 48
- 44
Can't answer that one, bar the fact that my ONC / HNC done by day release was only supported by the SLCs (can't remember the percentage, but it wasn't great) and all the assignments etc were done in my own time and fitted the whole idea of the AIP in the first place. Why a service course that would be used to promote somebody with a pay rise was ever thought to be useable for inceremental pay increase beats me!! Should never have been considered in the first place with them!
alwaysalecky
LAC
- 7
- 0
- 0
I'm in the admin offices bad books at the moment with regards AIP's. They are doing a 100% audit of AIP's, no recoveries are being actioned until a ministerial decision is made on what there plans are, got told it would be at the end of the month.
SirSaltyHelmet
Thoroughly Nice Chap
- 4,329
- 0
- 0
Mate, its not a techie thing, not just you guys in dark blue shirts that have issues.
alwaysalecky
LAC
- 7
- 0
- 0
Yes, because they found a problem with some CAS called for a 100% check from AIP's after 2004
Those with debits will have them appear on their pay statements as info only. I have sight of a mail today which advises that no decision has yet been made regarding recovery. When a decision is made, likely by Feb 13, full details of the appeal and recovery process will be promulgated at the same time.
This is no different to the screw over of Pay 2000 where we were told to dry your eyes princess we are claiming it back, and so my LSSA (as was) paid that back and some to the tune of a few grand. I mentioned this in a previous post, was the RAF ever going to give additional money and get it right? Still, its refreshing to see this turning into another admin bashing. Thing is the TG17 TS couldn't have provided the authority for the techie trades, so how is this an admin error exactly? Personally if it wasn't in the AP/JSP, you weren't getting it. For those that ignored that advice and went on to the TS who agreed it.....unlucky.
clungemobile
Corporal
- 316
- 0
- 0
Individual should check JSP or whatever it used to be....then go to PSF and 'discuss'.....PSF unsure.....TS approached.....PSF sure.....AIP submitted.
If the clerk was sure it was ok then he/she would put it through to SNCO/Chief Clerk....so there is another point it is checked before being actioned.
So who really is to blame.....all of you who were involved in the process.
...........it's only money:sorrow:
If the clerk was sure it was ok then he/she would put it through to SNCO/Chief Clerk....so there is another point it is checked before being actioned.
So who really is to blame.....all of you who were involved in the process.
...........it's only money:sorrow:
- 3,533
- 83
- 310
Really? I'm pretty sure TG1 have been 'represented' by a Shiny for a few years now. However, I could be wrong.
T
Tubby
Guest
Doesn't say that I sign for checking the eligability of my application in part 1, but, part 2 does say for the clerk to check and sign for eligability as well as giving the edition and date of the JSP it was checked against. Part 3 is Chief Clerk to check and approve. Part 4 is for TG4 trade sponsor only. Shinies check it and approve it, get paid handsomely to do this but won't take responibilty for it when it all goes pete tongue. Well theres a suprise.
Last edited:
DT_Xtremez_30:You're wrong. Its a TG 1 bod, we "career manage"all trades but we only TS TG17.
Do you think an SAC Clk will have the wherewithal to approve a BTEC in Wiggly Ampage as a relevant qualification? Nope they will have actioned what the TS gave them permission to do so.
T
Tubby
Guest
Do you think an SAC Clk will have the wherewithal to approve a BTEC in Wiggly Ampage as a relevant qualification? Nope they will have actioned what the TS gave them permission to do so.[/QUOTE]
No I wouldn't but in my case it appears to be the level not the qualifaction that is the problem. I am sure a JSP conservant SAC Clk can at least get that right. As you know it is the Chf Clk that approves it from a list agreed by the TS and others, the SAC merely checks eligability.
The vast majority of cases I know so far in my trade relate to the level of the qualifaction being the same as the first AIP (level 3) which should have been picked up by 2 different clks prior to approval. Oh thier was an issue with my fist AIP too, no copies of certificate. Clearly the cream of the crop at Lyneham at that time.
Millie glad you enjoyed it, you concentrate on being a spelling nazi if it takes your mind of the topic in hand princess. Wouldn't want you to feel as though adminers have no accountability for thier actions.
On a positive though, we now have an RAF SNCO adminer on our sqn now, breath of fresh air compaired to the useless cow who cant get my htd, op allowance, uwa etc etc sorted well after it was due.
No I wouldn't but in my case it appears to be the level not the qualifaction that is the problem. I am sure a JSP conservant SAC Clk can at least get that right. As you know it is the Chf Clk that approves it from a list agreed by the TS and others, the SAC merely checks eligability.
The vast majority of cases I know so far in my trade relate to the level of the qualifaction being the same as the first AIP (level 3) which should have been picked up by 2 different clks prior to approval. Oh thier was an issue with my fist AIP too, no copies of certificate. Clearly the cream of the crop at Lyneham at that time.
Millie glad you enjoyed it, you concentrate on being a spelling nazi if it takes your mind of the topic in hand princess. Wouldn't want you to feel as though adminers have no accountability for thier actions.
On a positive though, we now have an RAF SNCO adminer on our sqn now, breath of fresh air compaired to the useless cow who cant get my htd, op allowance, uwa etc etc sorted well after it was due.
T
Tubby
Guest
Haha people like me? What filling out forms and expecting people to do thier job properly when I hand them that form.
Nice one, you keep pointing that finger of blame. A better idea would be for you to concentrate on your apparently accountable role as you don't want the maistakes to bite you in the ass in 6,7,8 years time. Oh thats right, it's every body else that potentially gets screwed over isn't it, not you.
Nice one, you keep pointing that finger of blame. A better idea would be for you to concentrate on your apparently accountable role as you don't want the maistakes to bite you in the ass in 6,7,8 years time. Oh thats right, it's every body else that potentially gets screwed over isn't it, not you.