On the subject of pay...

[Stax]

Performance related pay, in its truest sense (not the namby pamby Pay 2000 option) will likely be introduced when we switch to performance related work contracts.

Such an idea is not too far round the corner. Basically if you perform at work then you get better pay and a longer contract (reviewed short term and not long term). You don't perform you loose pay and wopn't get signed on. Working contracts (9+6, 15, 22, LOS 30 etc) will be scrapped in favour of a short term work contract, nominal 4-5 years, then a career review. Those performing at the very top will get a longer signing on period than those performing at a lesser standard. Pay will be graduated to reflect performance, with an additional bonus for more quals etc

Good lord, is that another idea we are taking from industry? I would like to point out WE ARE IN THE MILITARY, STOP TRYING TO MAKE US RAF PLC! I thang U!

 

[TDJ]

Good lord, is that another idea we are taking from industry? I would like to point out WE ARE IN THE MILITARY, STOP TRYING TO MAKE US RAF PLC! I thang U!

Thanks stax, so what is actually wrong with the proposalDT_Xtremez_35:

 

[Stax]

The problem with the short term contracts is the wording of them. If we are telling people that we can refuse to extend their contract, then there will have to be a get out clause for them. Now, at the moment they have to PVR or hand in their notice, in which case we keep them for some time (albeit with resettlement etc) and they go off with plenty of time for the RAF to recruit (dont laugh) to fill the slot vacated. If you do short term contracts, we will be duty bound (I am sure there is EU legislation somewhere) to give them a shorter get out, a month perhaps, the same as industry. Consequently, how the hell can we plan ahead, particulary with the new vision of a more deployable RAF. When I joined up, we did, 3 yrs, then 6 yrs, then 9 and so on. You had to apply for each increase and if you assessments weren't up to it you were refused, or you weren't promoted before the 12 year mark, you didn't sign to 22. This didn't work so was changed to the system we have now, not perfect but at least you get some form of incremental pay, allowing the more experienced a better wage than the pond life! I worked with a civvy contractor recently, they pay better money for doing what our guys do, but they can be sacked, almost immeadiatley, for not performing and can leave at the drop of a hat, is that really what we want for an armed service? What we really need is a chancellor who understands what the armed forces are worth and pay accordingly. 2% for us and other public sector workers, nurses etc is disgusting, it is this government taking the pi55 out of those people who have died to further president Bliar's future.

Sorry rant over!

 

[Wing Warrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by trick400
How about performance related pay? We all know some fat lazy lard arse in the section who you want nothing to do with, they still get their pay raise - is that fair? What about those downgraded? What about if you don't do X days OOA on a 3 year period? What about linking pay with the number of pints necked in the NAAFI?

Well, perhaps not the last one...

But what do you think? Comments please



1. Fat lazy - Agree but apart from a good beating nothing can be done.
2. Downgraded - Totally agree, their increments should be stopped until fit to serve again.
3. OOA Days - Bit unfair on those trades that don't have that many OOA slots.
4. Pints Downed - Disagree, but only 'cause I'm a lightweight.

Those who fail the fitness test should also have their yearly increment held back until they can pass the test.

First of all sorry about the big quote bit.

The other day i was talking to a guy from PMA on the old dog and bone and we got on to the subject of the performance related pay and he told me the following.
with referance to the above:-
1.
The FAT AND LAZY people - If you do not get reccomended for promotion in your 6000 then PMA are well within there rights to hold you on the current pay level until you get a Rec or above!

2.
Again, PMA are well within there rights to hold you at your curent pay level until you're upgraded again, but the reason they don't do this is mostly for the reason fo people trying to sue them. With the majority of injuries being work related, then the injured person is also well within there rights to sue the Air Force for loss of earnings if they get held at a pay level.


Now i do agree with point 4 of the above.
A fair bit of the money made behind the bars goes back into the Air Force in one way or another, so if we have some sort of a reward sceme then people will spend more in the bars hence earning the Air Force more money.
Eventually turning in to a big visious circle. ( A good one)

 

[shouldhavetookredundancy]

I have spent some years of my service career in screened posts. Does that mean that I should have been paid less then?

 

[Martin Blank]

I'm a Heavy retrained to be an MT fitter as well and now i do my own admin thanks to JPA.......does that mean i should get 3x the pay? or not being greedy a 1/3rd more on my annual.
How about the rest of you multiskilled bod's, feeling agrieved as we're giving the RAF something for nothing?

DT_Xtremez_06:

 

[dkh51250]

Of course wot we shudda dun was join the NHS as administrators. Believe it or not ,even if they are in deficit, as many trusts are, they are in receipt of performance related bonuses. If the B*****ds had been football managers they would have been shown the door.

 

[Drunk Janner from GUZZ]

Performance related pay

Performance related pay

Not a good idea in my book.

I get my daily rate to be in the airforce and doing all the tosh I am told to do. Nothing has changed in that respect since the day I joined up.

The X factor bollox, which is not enough, takes care of the bullpoo factor. I think the new LSSA system is fairer to those who spend time away the most and credit to them, if you do not go away often you get the low rates however the new high rate is unrealistic to all but a elite minority. If your on JHC, TSW, TCW ETC and your away often then you should get a higher rate.

The RAF is limited to the amount it can give away on LSSA, remember we have overpaid political masters to consider who do not see achivement or efficiency (proper meaning IE right first time every time) only stats and budgets.

If we were to get peformance related pay the RAF could not afford the IA(I) overtime claim. NUFF SAID!