PAYD Bringing ISS To Its Knees

[The Masked Geek]

I think some people are mixing up the desire to pay for the food we ate with the move to private contract for food services.

We all said we would pay a little bit more for our food if we didn't have to pay for weekends.

And what, exactly, did you think the outcome was going to be?

The way we paid for food and the creative accounting of catering ensured that we had a bloody good meal in front of us three times a day.

We all knew that the amount we paid was woefully short of the actual cost of feeding us if we all attended every meal and we all knew that missing the odd meal or two improved the food that was available. Everyone missed weekends apart from the odd saddo who never left camp so it all evened out in the end.

Anyone who couldn't see that, IMO, was a retard. 90 quid got you food for a month, how could that not be a good deal? Most meals in the mess would have set you back over a fiver in the local pub..........

All that argument over, essentially, 12 quid a month. Pathetic.

But it's done now and I am well away from it. Reap what you sew.................

 

[Noidea]

It started before the last CO as a direct result of the recommendations made by the Garrison Engineer in DCRE - nothing to do with ISS at all; but, let's not let the facts get on the way of a good e-goat conspiracy theory.

But the last CO still got a CB for all of his hard work, a very concientious individual!

 

[I look like Bruce Willis]

Reap what you sew.................

I take no pleasure in this but, I think you meant sow. Farmers reap what they sow. Squippers sew things.

i hope this helps.

 

[Inevertouchedit]

And what, exactly, did you think the outcome was going to be?

The way we paid for food and the creative accounting of catering ensured that we had a bloody good meal in front of us three times a day.

We all knew that the amount we paid was woefully short of the actual cost of feeding us if we all attended every meal and we all knew that missing the odd meal or two improved the food that was available. Everyone missed weekends apart from the odd saddo who never left camp so it all evened out in the end.

Anyone who couldn't see that, IMO, was a retard. 90 quid got you food for a month, how could that not be a good deal? Most meals in the mess would have set you back over a fiver in the local pub..........

All that argument over, essentially, 12 quid a month. Pathetic.

But it's done now and I am well away from it. Reap what you sew.................

Absolutely spot on. Many's the time I came back from Xmas leave/long boozy detachment with about 3p to my name. Never a problem as I knew I had at least 3 good meals a day until the next payday. I always considered Messing as a damned good deal

 

[Joe_90]

It's been mentioned already but the system the lads wanted involved paying for meals eaten at the end of the month. This would mean that even if prices doubled to keep quality up it wouldn't really matter because they would never really see the money leaving their pockets. Instead with the current system there are very real concerns that guys aren't eating at the end of the month. The Army in particular have this problem but I've overheard SACs discuss having no money at the end of the month and tea bar tick lists in the last week can exceed twenty quid. I know the "hungry airman" rule exists but that relies on he airman coming forward and admitting he can't handle his money.

 

[Climebear]

It's been mentioned already but the system the lads wanted involved paying for meals eaten at the end of the month. This would mean that even if prices doubled to keep quality up it wouldn't really matter because they would never really see the money leaving their pockets. Instead with the current system there are very real concerns that guys aren't eating at the end of the month. The Army in particular have this problem but I've overheard SACs discuss having no money at the end of the month and tea bar tick lists in the last week can exceed twenty quid. I know the "hungry airman" rule exists but that relies on he airman coming forward and admitting he can't handle his money.

*Devil's Advocate Mode On*

And yet we claim to be a highly technical force with many trades either on or aspiring to be on the higher pay spine. However, those very same high-qaulity, intelligent people (or at least the third that lives in SLA) struggle to budget for their money throughout the month (like the vast majority of the population).

Just as well the Service provides toilet paper in their accommodation, otherwise the mess would be terrible.

*Devil's Advocate Mode Off*

 

[Inevertouchedit]

Strangely I picked this up on Twitter yesterday - #PAYD ??

 

[The Masked Geek]

I take no pleasure in this but, I think you meant sow.

I take even less pleasure in this: You're right.

 

[XVR RA RA RA]

But the last CO still got a CB for all of his hard work, a very concientious individual!

What, he got one of these? Poor guy, he must be a wannabe Leckie or they weren't pleased with his work.

 

[Joe_90]

*Devil's Advocate Mode On*

And yet we claim to be a highly technical force with many trades either on or aspiring to be on the higher pay spine. However, those very same high-qaulity, intelligent people (or at least the third that lives in SLA) struggle to budget for their money throughout the month (like the vast majority of the population).

Just as well the Service provides toilet paper in their accommodation, otherwise the mess would be terrible.

*Devil's Advocate Mode Off*

The vast majority are able to shop for the month and are allowed to cook in their accommodation. If the lads don't want to eat the woeful slop served by ISS, which is woeful slop due to price paid I admit, they have to buy takeaways. These are around 5 or 6 times the price of the constituant ingredients. PAYD in it's current form shouldn't have been introduced without cooking facilities being made available.

I'm also sure that the vast majority of singlies in the RAF cope well with PAYD but as the RAF isn't a standard employer does it's duty of care stretch further? The lads who do struggle could end up as admin burdens due to poor health, something I saw before PAYD in a singly who lived out and ate nothing but pizza. Everyone else started to take up the slack for him det wise and work wise while he was first going through remedial and then physio when he developed an injury shortly before admin action being taken against him.

I still like the theory behind PAYD now that I no longer live in, it doesn't affect me so I'm probably being quite selfish. Even just walking past the mess to get a meal ticket from the guardroom before going back again used to make me avoid it. I do think that more than one contractor on camp would increase standards though.

 

[Cirage]

And what, exactly, did you think the outcome was going to be?

The way we paid for food and the creative accounting of catering ensured that we had a bloody good meal in front of us three times a day.

We all knew that the amount we paid was woefully short of the actual cost of feeding us if we all attended every meal and we all knew that missing the odd meal or two improved the food that was available. Everyone missed weekends apart from the odd saddo who never left camp so it all evened out in the end.

Anyone who couldn't see that, IMO, was a retard. 90 quid got you food for a month, how could that not be a good deal? Most meals in the mess would have set you back over a fiver in the local pub..........

All that argument over, essentially, 12 quid a month. Pathetic.

But it's done now and I am well away from it. Reap what you sew.................

Being an ex Catering WO, totally agree with you, we relied on individuals missing some meals this helped to improve meals. It was always a struggle if one was serving at a Unit where going home at the weekend was difficult for the living in.

I and many of my peers said from the start what would likely happen and it would appear we are correct.

 

[feckinG RANT]

I take no pleasure in this but, I think you meant sow. Farmers reap what they sow. Squippers sew things.

i hope this helps.

I take no pleasure in this but, I think you meant 'I'?

I hope this helps.

 

[Mug?]

Exactly

Exactly

And what, exactly, did you think the outcome was going to be?

The way we paid for food and the creative accounting of catering ensured that we had a bloody good meal in front of us three times a day.

We all knew that the amount we paid was woefully short of the actual cost of feeding us if we all attended every meal and we all knew that missing the odd meal or two improved the food that was available. Everyone missed weekends apart from the odd saddo who never left camp so it all evened out in the end.

Anyone who couldn't see that, IMO, was a retard. 90 quid got you food for a month, how could that not be a good deal? Most meals in the mess would have set you back over a fiver in the local pub..........

All that argument over, essentially, 12 quid a month. Pathetic.

But it's done now and I am well away from it. Reap what you sew.................

Did you read my post?
We wanted service chefs but able to claim back our weekends, we can do that now but somehow we ended up with the solution to employ a civvy profit making company more interested in scrimping and paying the wages of execs.
The two ideas should be kept apart.
1. Paying for what you eat (more or less)
2. Giving a company the monopoly of feeding a station.

 

[The Masked Geek]

Did you read my post?
We wanted service chefs but able to claim back our weekends, we can do that now but somehow we ended up with the solution to employ a civvy profit making company more interested in scrimping and paying the wages of execs.

I read your post perfectly well and my point still stands. What did you expect?

The whole mess system revolved around people missing meals, including weekends. The only reason you got decent food was because of that. So, in a sense, we were subsidising our own food by not eating at weekends and missing the odd breakfast.

Take away the £12 per month that you'd save by not paying for weekends (Back in the day) and then start claiming for every missed meal and the whole catering financial world would have collapsed; leaving us with beans on toast every meal.

Did you never wonder at how you could pile your plate up with, arguably, a good tenner's worth of food for the measly price of £1.57? Or eat a Full English, a bowl of cereal and as much toast as you wanted for 83 pence?

Your missed meal on a weekend enabled you to eat at a high standard during the week.

Pay for what you ate? Bollox, you ate far more than what you paid for.

Being an ex Catering WO, totally agree with you, we relied on individuals missing some meals this helped to improve meals. It was always a struggle if one was serving at a Unit where going home at the weekend was difficult for the living in.

I and many of my peers said from the start what would likely happen and it would appear we are correct.

If only a few more of us had seen past the end of our own noses.......

 

[busby1971]

*Devil's Advocate Mode On*

And yet we claim to be a highly technical force with many trades either on or aspiring to be on the higher pay spine. However, those very same high-qaulity, intelligent people (or at least the third that lives in SLA) struggle to budget for their money throughout the month (like the vast majority of the population).

Just as well the Service provides toilet paper in their accommodation, otherwise the mess would be terrible.

*Devil's Advocate Mode Off*

The cost of eating in the mess should be comparable to the cost if eating at home, as all messes are your home.

The quality of the food in the mess should be comparable to the quality of the food you'd eat at home, same reasons as above.

If the food is cr@p unless you pay restaurant prices that is wrong as your salary isn't adjusted for this, **** pension, **** expensive food, more x factor please.

Sent from my MZ601 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Mug?]

Here goes

Here goes

I read your post perfectly well and my point still stands. What did you expect?

I expected my £12 (or £24 with my maths?) to get spread around and my meals to go up a bit. (50p/£1 a day I reckon for the 3 meals?)
£4-5 a day meal charge, no messing about with change and an extra fee for some bread.
They could use my money I paid for the breakfasts I wouldn't bother with (unless on Guard) and any leftover cash from my salad or jacket potato I had for lunch if I bothered.

The quality of food would stay the same as our excellent service chefs were specialists in making the grub last.
Roast chicken becomes chicken stir fry becomes chicken curry, becomes cold chicken on the salad bar.
Cake becomes dry cake becomes some trifle concoction.

We would have decent cheap food, extra bods around to do guards and duties, someone to put on a bit of section nosh at a fair price for the section BBQ.
A service bloke we could whinge at.
Trim down the management if you wanted to save costs.

I did not expect a private company (foreign I believe) to get a free reign to shut down or bully any competition. A reduction in quality and choice. The demise of the jnr ranks mess to all but a few young ones and duty blokes and contractors. The springing up of coffee shops where all the hierarchy descend on when you are trying to nip for a coffee after your lunch for a quiet gossip and moan with your mates. Then having to pay for a chocca, mocha frappe mucho costo coffee when a free nescafe bulk tin would do the job.

 

[Soon To Leave]

The cost of eating in the mess should be comparable to the cost if eating at home, as all messes are your home.

The quality of the food in the mess should be comparable to the quality of the food you'd eat at home, same reasons as above.

I agree with your sentiments but how can you compare costs of eating in a mess with eating at home when there are wages to pay and they are required to have a number of choices available in the hope you'll choose one?

The quality of food you have at home depends on the skills of the person preparing it but bear in mind it wouldn't be prepared in the quantities required of the mess and would be served and eaten at the optimum time.

That said, the quality and pricing of mess food should both be reasonable.

 

[muttywhitedog]

Bearing in mind that a 8 item breakfast in Tescos costs around £3, a McDonalds regular meal costs around £3.99, a foot long sub from subway costs around £5 and a Crown Carvery (roast only) is £3.79, I'd be interested to hear what price those most affected by PAYD would be prepared to pay for, say the following:

Breakfast - 2 sausages, 2 bacon, hash brown, egg, beans, toast, tea or coffee.

Lunch - 1/4Lb burger, chips, soft drink. Or made-to order sandwich (like subway)

Dinner - Roast carvery dinner with unlimited potatoes & veg, dessert and soft drink.

 

[Climebear]

Why do people in SLA or SSLA more than 3 miles away from a mess get extra money for food, whereas people in SFA or SSFA more than 3 miles from a mess don't get any extra money for food?

 

[The Masked Geek]

I expected my £12 (or £24 with my maths?) (True enough) to get spread around and my meals to go up a bit. (50p/£1 a day I reckon for the 3 meals?)

Which is exactly what happened under the old system under the control of the catering budget manager. Your missed meals money was used to improve the standard of all your meals. You are merely splitting hairs.

To enact what you are asking for would have required an overly complex accounting system that took into account all the variables including those who missed the whole weekend, those who missed part of the weekend, those who missed breakfast, those who missed breakfast and the weekend, those who missed monday meals, etc.....

So what they did was get rid of the problem and introduce PAYD. The RAF does not have the infrastructure, nor the personnel to manage a multi-tiered catering accounting system and so they contracted it out.