TG1 Retention again

[muttywhitedog]

Correct, but do they have to wear a blue suit? Is it feasible to civilianise that role?

Only problem might be that the MOD civ salary offered could be too low to attract suitably qualified personnel, who do not have a pension to bolster.

Its very much feasible. The MOD CS has a lot of people who are ex-military, and a H&S Officer/QCIT role would sit at the C2 grade which pays around 38k a year. If the job advert lists part of the essential criteria as "recent experience of aircraft engineering practices", you'd instantly be narrowing it down to ex-mil technicians who probably have a £12k+ a year pension that they will continue to receive, taking their salary to £50k+. Plus, there's no OOE, Guard Commander, Parades, short-notice postings etc.

 

[Billy Whizz]

As a QA CS myself, you are generally looking at most posts being an old style C1 (Lvl 3) now so on more than a QCIT Sgt (circa £50K) plus pension so very hard to recruit. Civvy QA pay about £70K too.

 

[Barch]

Its very much feasible. The MOD CS has a lot of people who are ex-military, and a H&S Officer/QCIT role would sit at the C2 grade which pays around 38k a year. If the job advert lists part of the essential criteria as "recent experience of aircraft engineering practices", you'd instantly be narrowing it down to ex-mil technicians who probably have a £12k+ a year pension that they will continue to receive, taking their salary to £50k+. Plus, there's no OOE, Guard Commander, Parades, short-notice postings etc.

Pensions should never be used to bolster wages; it is very short-sighted.

Many, many years ago, when training in aircraft maintenance was civilianised, Airworks and others paid pitiful wages and relied on retired chiefs to make up the workforce.

Suddenly, those chiefs retired and they had to start paying proper wages or lose their contracts.

 

[muttywhitedog]

Pensions should never be used to bolster wages; it is very short-sighted.

Not if you are accruing a CS Pension too which gives a nice lump sum and monthly pension far in excess than what I've contributed over the past decade. Until I took partial retirement in September, I was paid more than the head of my office when combining my RAF pension and my CS wage.

 

[Spearmint]

Not if you are accruing a CS Pension too which gives a nice lump sum and monthly pension far in excess than what I've contributed over the past decade. Until I took partial retirement in September, I was paid more than the head of my office when combining my RAF pension and my CS wage.

I'd have to disagree there MWD.

We in MOD may get 28.5% Pension but that's the one thing making up for the fact that we are at least 15% (25% in some cases) behind Industry pay for the equivalent set of responsibilities.

 

[Keyser Söze]

Pensions are, and must always be, separate from salary.

Whilst I totally agree with this in principal, the reality is often totally different. Please look at BAES/ Babcock / SERCO/ Affinity @ Cranwell to name but a few. Indeed I would go as far as saying any military equipment /support contract provider, will 'unofficially' consider a prospective employee's salary offer, and personnel with a pension are often low-balled as a result thus making them a cheaper solution, provided those guys remain within that employment 'family'. (a reason why I am not within that type of employment)

My point was in reply to an earlier view that in todays RAF, QSIT/H&S/CAM etc are a mandatory requirement but they don't necessarily need to be currently serving - but in order for that to happen the MOD need to pay the proper salary, which they will avoid and wriggle out of it by relying on Service personnel's pension

 

[ady eflog]

Having just hit 34 years, with 4 years to go, I'll happily take their 30K to stay in my current role, on 55K as a Chief, Pension is 26,778 on leaving at 55 and a lump sum of 94,094 and a pension at 67 of 35,424. Hell, i might stay till 59 to really milk the cats.