Pay rise?

[Weebl]

Just a general question here, to any techies that want to have a stab at it..........

If the RAF were to create a 3rd pay scale just for techies, how much more do you think you deserve to get? I'm not looking to start any arguments (i've had enough of them on here over the same subject!), i'm just interested to know how much better than the rest of us you think you are? Also, do you think any other trades deserve to join you?

It's not about 'we are better than you' Do you honestly believe you are 'better' than everyone in the country that earns less than you and inferior to anybody who earns more?

It has been covered ad infinitum the reasoning why TG1 believe they should be paid more than TGX. The slowdown in promotion due to the extra 2 ranks, the recognition that our civilian counterparts earn proportionally more due to the nature of the tasks carried out, etc etc.

As for the amount, look at what the differences used to be before paydebacle 2000 came in, and look at what TG1 civilian counterparts earn (difficult I know as the majority of our responsibilities have no direct read over) and using that, and the stuff mentioned earlier, come up with a reasonable figure.

Yes, other trades rather than TG1 should be on higher wages as well. 2 pay scales just does not fit the massively diverse skillsets and qualifications that the Air Force need, especially when the vast majority of it is on 1 pay scale.

In the short term, pay the AMM's high pay band. The fact that Aircraft Mechanics who carry out unsupervised Flight Servicings and supervised rectification get paid low pay band just rubs salt in the perception many techies have of being undervalued and abused.

 

[tacadmin]

It's not about 'we are better than you' Do you honestly believe you are 'better' than everyone in the country that earns less than you and inferior to anybody who earns more?

It has been covered ad infinitum the reasoning why TG1 believe they should be paid more than TGX. The slowdown in promotion due to the extra 2 ranks, the recognition that our civilian counterparts earn proportionally more due to the nature of the tasks carried out, etc etc.

As for the amount, look at what the differences used to be before paydebacle 2000 came in, and look at what TG1 civilian counterparts earn (difficult I know as the majority of our responsibilities have no direct read over) and using that, and the stuff mentioned earlier, come up with a reasonable figure.

Yes, other trades rather than TG1 should be on higher wages as well. 2 pay scales just does not fit the massively diverse skillsets and qualifications that the Air Force need, especially when the vast majority of it is on 1 pay scale.

In the short term, pay the AMM's high pay band. The fact that Aircraft Mechanics who carry out unsupervised Flight Servicings and supervised rectification get paid low pay band just rubs salt in the perception many techies have of being undervalued and abused.

Good answer. I don't think i'm better than anyone who earns less than me by the way
It's a tricky one this I think. As you've already said, there's an awful lot to take into consideration. I wouldn't say you've got 2 extra ranks any more though. SAC(T) is still an SAC, the difference being how far up the pay levels they can progress if they haven't done their technicians course. And this is rarely an issue as 99% will have done the course before they get anywhere near level 5 or 6.
I can't comment much on AMM's for the higher pay scale, as I don't know much about the responsibilities they get. But they are slightly disadvantaged when compared with Gen Techs that do all of their Phase II trg in 'a one-er'.
As for the extra rank at Chf Tech level, they still get a FS's pension, so it's not all bad is it?
While we're on the subject, are the skill levels and responsibilities of your civilian counterparts that similar?

 

[sausage2]

i'm just interested to know how much better than the rest of us you think you are? ?

Its not to do with thinking we're better than anyone else, It's to do with the resposibility of the job. I've never had a problem with the adminers pay rise, what I do begrugde is getting paid the same as them.

The resposibility levels just do not compare. If you as an adminer really, really fcuk up in your job, whats the worst case senario? Some one does not get paid or their leave is fcuked up. I'm for no minute saying that your job is not important or indeed vital. I like getting paid and I like going on leave.


If a techy really, really fcuks up in his job, whats the worst case senario then?

 

[tacadmin]

Its not to do with thinking we're better than anyone else, It's to do with the resposibility of the job. I've never had a problem with the adminers pay rise, what I do begrugde is getting paid the same as them.

The resposibility levels just do not compare. If you as an adminer really, really fcuk up in your job, whats the worst case senario? Some one does not get paid or their leave is fcuked up. I'm for no minute saying that your job is not important or indeed vital. I like getting paid and I like going on leave.


If a techy really, really fcuks up in his job, whats the worst case senario then?

You could say the same about a medic? One SAC (that shall remain nameless once tried to inject our Chf Clk with Polio! - scary stuff). Sorry techies, i'm certainly not trying to compare you to that bunch of wasters.
I agree that if your job is justifiably underpaid, then you should be rewarded accordingly. I just haven't seen any real 'evidence' that this is the case. I;ve just heard stories about former RAF employees that are now earning more in civvy street etc.
I don't think my job is as skilled, or hazerdous as yours, and I was as surprised as you when we were put on the higher pay band. But to keep every trade happy we'd more than 1 extra band wouldn't we?

 

[insty66]

As for the extra rank at Chf Tech level, they still get a FS's pension, so it's not all bad is it? The pension is an anomoly as you can't give a Chief a Sgts pension. A Chief though doesn't get the full career option and when he/she is promoted to FS there are only a couple of increments available to them. Unlike a FS who got promoted as the same time as the Chief who has a head start on the road to WO and the extra increments and extra tme to get there.

While we're on the subject, are the skill levels and responsibilities of your civilian counterparts that similar? Yes and no! In lots of ways our jobs are more responsible, there are also parts of our work a civilian would never have to do and of coursethere are also many instances where the civillian has more responsibility than some of us can ever imagine.
I'm suprised to find that even in the current climate with my Chiefy skills I can command over £250 a day on contract work. For unlicenced work i can, with a bit of luck be paid more than I get now!

It's not as simple as a straight read across because we maintain the aircraft in different ways.

Before pay 2000 the RAF was paid in accordance with "the consequence of error" principle. It basically means that "if you screw up what's the worst that can happen?" the bigger the disaster, the bigger the pay! We were told this at Swinderby!

IIRC Chefs were paid quite well under this scheme!

We would need more than 3 pay bands to be scrupulously fair but first we'd have to get the Army & Navy to agree!

 

[Webbo]

Good answer. I don't think i'm better than anyone who earns less than me by the way
It's a tricky one this I think. As you've already said, there's an awful lot to take into consideration. I wouldn't say you've got 2 extra ranks any more though. SAC(T) is still an SAC, the difference being how far up the pay levels they can progress if they haven't done their technicians course.

Yes there are 2 extra ranks because a SAC(T) is not a Junior Magician and never will be due to the introduction of SAC(T) system. LAC, SAC, JT, CPL, SGT, C/T, F/S (this is proper Techie promotion), not LAC, SAC, CPL, SGT, F/S (which is everyone else). Bit of a difference don't you think, or shall I add how long the training is to get promoted.

 

[sally cinnamon]

We had a visit from the soon to be CAS the other week, and he informed us that there will be a major review of the pay system (something reflecting the current officer one scale system) late 2010, and 'it is wrong that technicians are payed the same as other trades, flying and fixing are our core business' and one of his main aims was to rectify this. This was in a room of around 30 station personel, with only about 6 techies in there! he brought it up of his own accord, so he wasn' t just trying to please the crowd! so maybe, just maybe, something is in the pipeline

 

[Spearmint]

Recently I have been hearing that a senior Zob has been tasked with coming up with a new Techie pay scale and has been given 12 months to do so. Well that's what is being said around the camp fire by 'The Queen Of The Skies' lot.

 

[JPABitch]

There is nothing in the pipeline for "Techie Pay"; the concept of a Single Payspine has been around for a little while and is being worked on by the pay Gurus in London. Given the complexity of managing people onto the spine at the correct level it is causing a major headache.DT_Xtremez_34:

 

[Claustie]

There is nothing in the pipeline for "Techie Pay"; the concept of a Single Payspine has been around for a little while and is being worked on by the pay Gurus in London. Given the complexity of managing people onto the spine at the correct level it is causing a major headache.DT_Xtremez_34:

Well, it's not like Adminers have anything else to do is it, aprat from shuffling paper around the desk! It cant be that hard to organize a new techie pay scale. Or should us techies get around a table and do that, aswell as sorting out our own JPA? DT_Xtremez_14:

It's simple, If your an A/C Techie type (Trade Grp 1 & 2) then you get on the new pay scale!!! How hard is that? Job done, i'm off to the pub! DT_Xtremez_14:

Regards

Claustie

 

[AVSNCO]

Techies aren't saying that they are better than everyone else!

The best explanation I can give is if the score required to place a trade group on to the high pay band is 50 points some trades score 50. Trade group 1 scores somewhere in the region of 75-80 points, way above the entry level points required. This is one of the main reasons that reviews are in place to try and address the indifference. Please don’t quote me on the figures as they aren't exact just an example.

When you look at the areas assessed for which pay band a trade group is placed on there are vast differences.

The reason I feel why so many techies are p***ed at other trades being moved on the high pay band is those trades who scrape onto the high band and those that are way above the mark. It's also the complete contempt in which we are held with the higher management tiers. Why spend two years plus in training and have all the responsibilities associated with the position undertaking shift work when you can spend a fraction of the time in training with fewer responsibilities, regular hours and still get paid the same.

Since Pay 2000 engineering trades have seen the abolishment of the three tier system, had multi-skilling forced upon them - that's the combining of two aircraft trades merged into one, effectively taking on the knowledge base and responsibilities of two trades and had massive redundancies throughout tranche 1,2 &3.

Compound all this with other trades rising onto the same pay level without the same level of change. High pay band or not, there simple isn't anywhere else for the trade to go.

Trade group 1 is hemorrhaging people at the moment and it will only get worse. You cannot simple move people around the Air Force to where ever there is a current short fall. You need time and experience to become effective and these are the people that are leaving. You cannot simple recruit X amount to fill the gap.

Look after the people you've already got and you won't have a problem.

 

[squipper]

Please can get away from the "Techie Pay" phrase. It has never exsisted and never will, it is higher or lower pay band that is it. You do not here the rocks banging on about "Infantry Pay"
If you are only in the RAF because you went into the higher pay scale then you are in the wrong company, I assume you joined because you wanted to be an aircraft engineer. If you want to earn more than someone else.....leave...join the RAF again and become a Pilot!!!!

 

[Weebl]

Please can get away from the "Techie Pay" phrase. It has never exsisted and never will, it is higher or lower pay band that is it. You do not here the rocks banging on about "Infantry Pay"
If you are only in the RAF because you went into the higher pay scale then you are in the wrong company, I assume you joined because you wanted to be an aircraft engineer. If you want to earn more than someone else.....leave...join the RAF again and become a Pilot!!!!

A few points. Most of the people using the phrase 'Techie pay' are not Techies. It is a carry over from before pay 2000 when other trades referred to TG1 and 2 pay as such.

Most of us are not in the RAF simply because we went onto the higher pay scale. You clearly have not read the thread before kneejerking this post out. The reasons for TG1 making waves about pay have been covered in detail in this thread.

!!11!!!!one.

 

[snowball1]

On and on and on it goes!

 

[rest have risen above me]

I know a thread that'll get on your nerves, get on your nerves, get on your nerves. I know a thread that'll get on your nerves, get on your nerves, get on your nerves. I know a..................

It only gets on my nerves because you clingons know we're right and deserve some more money... I wish you'd just shut up and accept that we've been let down and deserve to moan..

 

[SgtScribbly]

here we go, this is the distilled version of the current brief from COS Pers ...

there is a plan to look into the current pay system from Apr - Dec this year. One of the possble proposals is a 5 band pay scheme. However, NONE of the trades/ranks in the RAf would make the top level (SAS troopers, mine clearance divers etc would, dont forget its a tri service thing). A bigger however, however, is that only ONE trade would currently score onto the second level 2 of 5.

Anyone want to hazard a guess which trade it is?

 

[insty66]

here we go, this is the distilled version of the current brief from COS Pers ...

there is a plan to look into the current pay system from Apr - Dec this year. One of the possble proposals is a 5 band pay scheme. However, NONE of the trades/ranks in the RAf would make the top level (SAS troopers, mine clearance divers etc would, dont forget its a tri service thing). A bigger however, however, is that only ONE trade would currently score onto the second level 2 of 5.

Anyone want to hazard a guess which tade it is?

Coppaz!!!!!DT_Xtremez_30:DT_Xtremez_30:

 

[R_Squared]

.......admin?

 

[Sospan]

here we go, this is the distilled version of the current brief from COS Pers ...

there is a plan to look into the current pay system from Apr - Dec this year. One of the possble proposals is a 5 band pay scheme. However, NONE of the trades/ranks in the RAf would make the top level (SAS troopers, mine clearance divers etc would, dont forget its a tri service thing). A bigger however, however, is that only ONE trade would currently score onto the second level 2 of 5.

Anyone want to hazard a guess which tade it is?

Bombheads ?

 

[sparks will fly]

Geffries!!!!!