Future of TG17

[ForgottenName]

I think we are straying off topic. I think it very likely that Stn Cdrs' PAs across the board will be civilianised in the near future anyway, but whether they are or not PA jobs make up only a tiny proportion of the trade as a whole.

TBJ. What I was trying to say that I believe that any post that is outside of the main core of TG17 is vulnerable to be changed as you note above.

 

[busby1971]

Core?

Core?

TBJ. What I was trying to say that I believe that any post that is outside of the main core of TG17 is vulnerable to be changed as you note above.

What is considered core nowadays?

Jobs (postings) back in blighty should surely provide a genuine function, maintain the skills required for when on ops, stretch the individual and provide career development (as both a Pers Admin and Air(wo)man) and allow a period a personal stability until the next ever more frequent det.

Back on track now...

 

[Humble Scribe]

Core is the PFA whether it be in PSF, Sqn/Wg Admin they all do the same job effectively. Leaves PA's, TD, registries even, dare I say, CM's etc at risk. Suits me fine but there'll be many worried shiney out there!

 

[tommo9999]

Core is the PFA whether it be in PSF, Sqn/Wg Admin they all do the same job effectively. Leaves PA's, TD, registries even, dare I say, CM's etc at risk. Suits me fine but there'll be many worried shiney out there!

I agree that PFA is core TG17. Regarding CM's I'm not so sure. Would our pers be content being drafted by civilians, and all that brings? It routinely comes up for discussion, but for as long as I can recall, every Air Sec has stated that blue suits will be drafted by blue suits.

 

[Humble Scribe]

I agree that PFA is core TG17. Regarding CM's I'm not so sure. Would our pers be content being drafted by civilians, and all that brings? It routinely comes up for discussion, but for as long as I can recall, every Air Sec has stated that blue suits will be drafted by blue suits.

That's a change of tune from you! I thought you were an advocate of civvies in CM slot's or at least holding the belief that it will happen one day. Wouldn't like to see it myself but I'm sure the day will come sooner or later; hopefully not while I'm still wearing a blue suit though!

 

[tommo9999]

I'm not convinced of the benefits of civvies becoming CM's, but I think it will happen. Eventually.

 

[KingGuin]

I'm not convinced of the benefits of civvies becoming CM's, but I think it will happen. Eventually.

The Army have employed civilians in that role for years. However interestingly enough the troops are managed by civil servants while their officer cadre is managed by ROs!

 

[True Blue Jack]

The Army have employed civilians in that role for years. However interestingly enough the troops are managed by civil servants while their officer cadre is managed by ROs!

Army drafting is done very differently from ours. In reality, soldiers' careers are managed at unit level by RCMOs (usually a WO1 or Captain commissioned from the ranks) and Division SO2s. The "drafter" at the relevant MCM Div does no more or less than put bums on seats.

It would be like having all careers on station managed personally by WO PMS/PSF.

 

[ForgottenName]

I agree that PFA is core TG17. quote]

You are spot on there Tommo999. The big clue is in what we train the PABCs at RAFSA before they become productive.

 

[ForgottenName]

Army drafting is done very differently from ours. In reality, soldiers' careers are managed at unit level by RCMOs (usually a WO1 or Captain commissioned from the ranks) and Division SO2s. The "drafter" at the relevant MCM Div does no more or less than put bums on seats.

It would be like having all careers on station managed personally by WO PMS/PSF.

TBJ, it is interesting to see how the RN conduct drafting. You may wish to have a look at the Waterfront Manning Offices at those units that have aircraft that can hover.

 

[ForgottenName]

In respect of Career Managers (drafters in old money) I believe that the move to H-W is going to cause them significant problems - for no other reason than there may not be enough space. Also, I believe that there may be additional AO work for them with the introduction of the new appraisal as people move from post to post.

In 1998, the then Sec Sponsor stated that "Chf Clks were RAF PMA's agents on the ground". Therefore, I was wondering whether we could develop that concept.

 

[Humble Scribe]

In 1998, the then Sec Sponsor stated that "Chf Clks were RAF PMA's agents on the ground". Therefore, I was wondering whether we could develop that concept.

Spot on FN and something we've discussed in the shiney Forum. CC's should develop their LAC/SAC's managing them on Stn and ensuring that the are posted to an appropriate post at an appropriate time. It's not going to be easy but it certainly needs looking into.

 

[tommo9999]

Absolutely. Chf Clk's should be left alone (and therefore trusted) to manage their people locally.

 

[True Blue Jack]

I've been watching how the engineers on my Sqns are moved around between their core trade and other jobs, e.g., Rects control, SLOC, etc. One of the many things they gain from this is an appreciation of how the whole engineering team works, and how they fit into the grand scheme. It also builds redundancies into the system so that if the incumbent Rects Controller goes long term sick there is always at least one other person with recent experience in the role. Somehow they manage to do it without losing continuity.

It galls me to say it (lol), but we have a lot to learn from the engineers' approach. More importantly, I think there could be a future role for TG17 in taking the squadron approach and expanding it across a whole station (and further).

 

[KingGuin]

I've been watching how the engineers on my Sqns are moved around between their core trade and other jobs, e.g., Rects control, SLOC, etc. One of the many things they gain from this is an appreciation of how the whole engineering team works, and how they fit into the grand scheme. It also builds redundancies into the system so that if the incumbent Rects Controller goes long term sick there is always at least one other person with recent experience in the role. Somehow they manage to do it without losing continuity.

It galls me to say it (lol), but we have a lot to learn from the engineers' approach. More importantly, I think there could be a future role for TG17 in taking the squadron approach and expanding it across a whole station (and further).

TBJ - I shuffle my lot already. My original rationale was personnel (and personal) development. However the ongoing (and ongoing) TG17 review alongside the FMDL, operational deployments and sickness etc etc means that my troops are shuffled more from necessity than desire. As for adopting engineering practices, TG17 here have been subject to QA for almost a year and without exception admit it works.

 

[busbyboy]

TBJ - I shuffle my lot already. My original rationale was personnel (and personal) development. However the ongoing (and ongoing) TG17 review alongside the FMDL, operational deployments and sickness etc etc means that my troops are shuffled more from necessity than desire. As for adopting engineering practices, TG17 here have been subject to QA for almost a year and without exception admit it works.

KG, as you well know, I was heavily involved in the advance of QA at said Unit, and am pleased to see it thriving. However, it is now time to move to the next stage of integrating into the Stn QCIT system and embrace independent audit (as opposed to self audit) organised by the QCM as part of the schedule. Only by doing this, can we (you) be confident that HR is doing what it says on the tin. It will happen anyway, probably sooner rather than later, so carpe diem and all that bull. I understand that you now have time on your hands since my successor arrived, or was that the red wine talking on Fri...!

 

[ForgottenName]

KG, as you well know, I was heavily involved in the advance of QA at said Unit, and am pleased to see it thriving. However, it is now time to move to the next stage of integrating into the Stn QCIT system and embrace independent audit (as opposed to self audit) organised by the QCM as part of the schedule. Only by doing this, can we (you) be confident that HR is doing what it says on the tin. It will happen anyway, probably sooner rather than later, so carpe diem and all that bull. I understand that you now have time on your hands since my successor arrived, or was that the red wine talking on Fri...!

Independent, as in by a trade non-specialist, ie, external auditor, is fine if the instructions that the operators are following are right in the first place.

 

[busby1971]

QA Works

QA Works

Spent time on an Engineering Unit and I loved the QA side of things.

Each Task/job/process was broken down to almost MacJob level and amended to cope with rule and other changes (by the incumbent). This not only listed the admin actions but also the applicant/customer actions.

By having a standard to follow, anybody could come along and do the job just as long as the 'manual' was comprehensive and complete. This would make moving people around a lot easier and would help to ensure that there is a best practice out there.

There is a need to have a latent general trade knowledge, the wider view about how things work, sitting in your grey matter but being an expert in only one area and only knowing that area is not the best, get us all moving around and we will all understand the pressures, pains and joys of each others jobs.

But there should be a plan for each individual, they should have a rough idea of when they are going to be moved (subject to the usual caveats) and where to. Individual goals should be put in place to ensure and individual does not treat each post as a quick stepping stone but a job that requires their best efforts. If it results in the best gyrating towards PSF (or what ever you want to call it) then they should have had a chance to work around the station first.

One of the better aspects of the QA manual was the onus on the customer to follow the process as well, great for chasing up 6000s, and highlighting where the real admin problems lay.

 

[ForgottenName]

Spent time on an Engineering Unit and I loved the QA side of things.

Each Task/job/process was broken down to almost MacJob level and amended to cope with rule and other changes (by the incumbent). This not only listed the admin actions but also the applicant/customer actions.

By having a standard to follow, anybody could come along and do the job just as long as the 'manual' was comprehensive and complete. This would make moving people around a lot easier and would help to ensure that there is a best practice out there.

There is a need to have a latent general trade knowledge, the wider view about how things work, sitting in your grey matter but being an expert in only one area and only knowing that area is not the best, get us all moving around and we will all understand the pressures, pains and joys of each others jobs.

But there should be a plan for each individual, they should have a rough idea of when they are going to be moved (subject to the usual caveats) and where to. Individual goals should be put in place to ensure and individual does not treat each post as a quick stepping stone but a job that requires their best efforts. If it results in the best gyrating towards PSF (or what ever you want to call it) then they should have had a chance to work around the station first.

One of the better aspects of the QA manual was the onus on the customer to follow the process as well, great for chasing up 6000s, and highlighting where the real admin problems lay.

QA has its uses and, for what it is worth, I believe that we may be going down that route. However, with the introduction of JPA, we have suffered from a lack of instruction. That is not because of a lack of willingness of any individual, but because the amount of change has been so significant, it has overwhelmed many. Because of this, many units started writing their own instructions; some are good but some could do with improving as they miss out important processes to follow. We now need to get a common standard so that we can improve what we do first before we get ourselves into the audit phase.

 

[busby1971]

QA ..... That is not because of a lack of willingness of any individual, but because the amount of change has been so significant, it has overwhelmed many. .... We now need to get a common standard so that we can improve what we do first before we get ourselves into the audit phase.

Is JPA and it's processes settled down enough to be stable enough to have a standard practice yet.

The Audit phase should be seen as a part of the best practice process, (which has been it's main role recently), the sooner we have a common set of processes the sooner those who develop the training programme can send out properly trained Pers Admin.