I dont think anyone is whinging necessarily about the 14 month TRT more the fact that 40% of the rank isn't able to participate in the OOA's. If it was 14 month TRT with say 90% of the trade doing their bit it wouldn't be such a bitter pill to swallow.
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
I dont think anyone is whinging necessarily about the 14 month TRT more the fact that 40% of the rank isn't able to participate in the OOA's. If it was 14 month TRT with say 90% of the trade doing their bit it wouldn't be such a bitter pill to swallow.
- 1,003
- 48
- 98
Apologies RB I didn't come accross very well, what I ment to say was that even thought the Army send out personel acting 2 ranks up we would not.
If you look at my post properly I did indicate that you wouldn't want a SAC from an MOB looking after TSW in the field as they would not have the necassary experience to fufil that role.
441staines
LAC
- 61
- 0
- 0
You might be some sad o' who's married to the RAF and has no life outside, but I suggest the majority of us are'nt and view 14 months TRT as unacceptable, 2 and a half/ 3 years is fine and should be expected. I agree the 40% figure is shocking, but where does this come from? The main trouble is once more we are doing the bidding of politicians who want their names in the history books so future gernerations can read about how they saved the world, even our closest ally has taken several steps backwards in this utter waste of money. Thats my rant over, and before you ask I am sick and lame, but I still go away.
- 28
- 0
- 0
Having read the previous posts I agree that 14 month (and below) TRT for OOA currently experienced by Cpls in Supply is unacceptable and unsustaniable!
Yes we are in a military service and should expect that we will undergo a certain amount of hardship, however if this pain is shared amongst other trades and ranks this becomes more bearable. But this is clearly not the case and from what I can see will only get worse (SDSR and redundances due to be announced in Sept).
Getting SACs to 'act up' is a way round this problem in the short term and obviously gives those individuals an extra tick in the box come assessment time. But only covers the fact that there are not enough Cpls in the trade to keep harmony levels. It is not a case of to many sickies (yes there are some but no worse than other trades and ranks in the RAF), there are just not enough Cpls. The trade should be able to handle its harmony rates and if it can not then perphaps it needs to look at its manpower scaling as a whole.
I am not a Cpl but I understand their frustrations. I hope things improve for them in the future but I am not sure it will. For those that say its life in a blue suit, perhaps it is, but it still doesn't make it right.
My 2 pence worth!!!
Yes we are in a military service and should expect that we will undergo a certain amount of hardship, however if this pain is shared amongst other trades and ranks this becomes more bearable. But this is clearly not the case and from what I can see will only get worse (SDSR and redundances due to be announced in Sept).
Getting SACs to 'act up' is a way round this problem in the short term and obviously gives those individuals an extra tick in the box come assessment time. But only covers the fact that there are not enough Cpls in the trade to keep harmony levels. It is not a case of to many sickies (yes there are some but no worse than other trades and ranks in the RAF), there are just not enough Cpls. The trade should be able to handle its harmony rates and if it can not then perphaps it needs to look at its manpower scaling as a whole.
I am not a Cpl but I understand their frustrations. I hope things improve for them in the future but I am not sure it will. For those that say its life in a blue suit, perhaps it is, but it still doesn't make it right.
My 2 pence worth!!!
- 1,003
- 48
- 98
Some people have strayed off thread, that aside we are engaged in combat ops in 2 different locations. I beleive that 14 month TRT for Cpl's is cr*p., regardless what you think. And we should not be sending out SAC's acting up to fulfill OOA slots, my opinion.
FYI - I am not sick lame or lazy, I deploy ahead of my LTA(last 3 times and over Xmas) due to people going wibble or twisting their sock. I do my det's and all that comes with it.
stacker4ever
Hot Refueller
- 198
- 0
- 0
I've missed youDT_Xtremez_22:
Missed you too Norman.
Manning is based on what the military has told the Govt it can support, which at present is 1 large scale and 1 small scale or 2 medium scale ops etc etc (Afghan is classed as medium, Libya I would say small). So at present we are not undermanned on paper (i agree with most that we are). What is going to happen to the TR times when Libya is done probably in the near future and the draw down of Afghan by 2015? They will go back up to 2-3 yrs more than likely.
So for a sustained period whilst combat operations are going on those who volunteered for active service by joining up are now moaning about having to do what fundamentally they joined up to do. I just cant understand why you would join something as a volunteer and then complain when you are actually putting all the training into practice by supporting real time operations. If you dont like it then simple answer is leave but then you all want the good pension and benefits of being in service (and there must be some or you would have left ages ago) so you wont.
So we have 473 cpls against an establishment of 500 and 38% of these 473 are unavailable for DWR.
Therefore, there are about 293 who are available against a pre-ELLAMY committment of 40 DWR posts. 40 x 4 month tour = 120 posts a year need to be filled. 120 posts divided by 293 people available = a TRT of 2.4 years.
If the ELLAMY posts come on line it will increase the commitment by 7 x 4 month tours, or 21 posts per year. 161/293 = a TRT of about 2 years.
To get the TRT down to 14 months would require a committment of 230 per year against a current availability of 62%. What am I missing?
Therefore, there are about 293 who are available against a pre-ELLAMY committment of 40 DWR posts. 40 x 4 month tour = 120 posts a year need to be filled. 120 posts divided by 293 people available = a TRT of 2.4 years.
If the ELLAMY posts come on line it will increase the commitment by 7 x 4 month tours, or 21 posts per year. 161/293 = a TRT of about 2 years.
To get the TRT down to 14 months would require a committment of 230 per year against a current availability of 62%. What am I missing?
- 1,003
- 48
- 98
BJW, I coundn't agree with you more. But I can deffinetly confirm that there are 3 SAC's going to fill 3 Cpl slots OOA. If you want more info drop me a PM.
- 28
- 0
- 0
If we are scaled correctly to operate 1 large or 2 medium conflicts (lets not forget our ongoing commitments down south) then why are we overstretched at just one rank. Surely we should be overstretched in all ranks or none! This is the major reason I believe why there is unhappiness with the current situation.
While I agree that people joined up to do a job it seems unfair that overstretch is confined to a rank range, especially at (yet another) time when promotion is restricted due to external factors. This means that those who are facing these overstretch situations are likely to face them for longer.
I liked the figures produced by BJW and it does seem strange that given those numbers Cpls are having such a hard time of it. Even more unpalatable when viewed against their exclusion from the high pay band.
The majority of us just 'crack on' with getting the job done, but that does not mean that they can not express concerns over their current conditions.
While I agree that people joined up to do a job it seems unfair that overstretch is confined to a rank range, especially at (yet another) time when promotion is restricted due to external factors. This means that those who are facing these overstretch situations are likely to face them for longer.
I liked the figures produced by BJW and it does seem strange that given those numbers Cpls are having such a hard time of it. Even more unpalatable when viewed against their exclusion from the high pay band.
The majority of us just 'crack on' with getting the job done, but that does not mean that they can not express concerns over their current conditions.
No need mate, I know it's happening. One of the previous posts about cpls going away as a/sgt though is still questionable.
Here's another bunch of stats for you. Based on current strength the % of posts OOA for each rank are:
WO - 7.7%
FS - 6.3%
Sgt - 7.0%
Cpl - 8.45%
SAC - 7.8%
Based on current availability they are:
WO - 11.11%
FS - 10.34%
Sgt - 11.24%
Cpl - 13.65%
SAC - 11.03%
Again, if you take these at face value there really shouldn't be that much difference in TRTs between the ranks and all should be between 24-36 months. Given that SACs currently have a lower % than cpls though it makes sense to send some OOA with acting rank. I am advised that before such appointments are made Sqn WOs are consulted as to the suitability of the individual selected. I suspect that with more promotions to cpl predicted than new recruits through the door in the next 6 months these figures may well swap over. We shall see.
Lies, damn lies and statistics - you choose
P
P4uldustmonkey
Guest
I am one of those lucky ( or not so lucky) SAC's going OOA acting up.
This is my first time actually going to replace a CPL the last time i was given it the day i arrived.
This is my first time actually going to replace a CPL the last time i was given it the day i arrived.
logisticus
LAC
- 75
- 0
- 0
Im actually doing it now OOA with 5 days notice to move but on the plus side I aint getting paid for it!!!! No no glass back Cpl you sit at home eating burgers till 0800 monday when you have an appointment with SMO again cos fitness test is due. Enjoy spending the money I am earning for you.
Get on with it or get out..simples
Get on with it or get out..simples
Listen mate, if you don't like doing what you're doing then go see the Boss in the morning and express your view. Say to him. 'hey, I'm not happy. I'm so unhappy that I want to wear the SAC rank slides from today onwards'.
Get on with it or get out..simples
Listen mate, if you don't like doing what you're doing then go see the Boss in the morning and express your view. Say to him. 'hey, I'm not happy. I'm so unhappy that I want to wear the SAC rank slides from today onwards'.
Joseph's right..... you could be going OOA as an SAC. FFS most SAC's I know would love a chance to prove their worth as a JNCO. I suppose you'll be just as threaders if you get an awesome insert into your SJAR this year and manage to one of the few that get picked up on the next round of promotions?
You have had a ****e time in the RAF if MPC is your best 4 months!
P
POB
Guest
Completely agree, but as the system is not going to change just 'cos we don't like it, if you do get pinged for an OOA with a temporary (unpaid) promotion, make the best of it and prove that you're worth the real thing. But the fact remains that it should NOT happen, the RAF should have enough people to cover it's commitments!