Any feedback from this? Was it useful or just pulpit bashing by the high and mighty?
Can’t find anything on s/point (no real surprise) other than a list of attendees.
CI feedback was a report will follow-our ci enjoyed!
Two months on and nothing as yet, hardly busting a gut are they.
I can imagine a large number of CIs will be interested (or should be) in the views and opinions of HQAC in terms of how CIs fit into the Corps.
i rather doubt theres a CI in the entire organisation who needs a report from the conference to know exactly where HQAC thinks they fit into the Corps.
sugar?
1 Like
Ah yes but much better to know in writing that unless you want to don a blue suit they’re not interested.
OK, has anybody got any news of how the ‘convention’ actually went, what was discussed etc etc?
There seems to be a great silence out there!!
I’m aorry, but it has to be considered demeaning & insulting for no feedback to have sent out yet.
2 Likes
Was it ever going to be anything else?
Demeaning and insulting is HQAC’s - and not just HQAC’s - attitude towards CI’s.
1 Like
Don’t talk rubbish. Our Wing values CIs a lot and involves them at all levels.
But does your Wing or anywhere in the Corps value them enough to give them proper Wing roles.
I know (and so do many others around the country I imagine) CIs who are and have been the best qualified/knowledgable people to do Wing roles, but this organisation is so hung up on uniform, heirarchy and rank, we have had to have Officers or at a push a SNCO who quite frankly are poor substitutes who constantly refer to the CIs for advice and get them to do things they have no idea about.
Putting people into jobs who know sod all in reality doesn’t work in the real world, so why it should in the Corps is a mystery.
In any volunteer organisation you want the best people you have doing things and not just because they are of specific rank or wear a uniform.
2 Likes
There’s three holding wing staff roles
Which ones? Out of interest.
One primary role, two you may class as support roles. I won’t saw exactly as it don’t take a genius to trawl the staff directories and work out which wing.
Are they former uniformed staff who had specific knowledge etc or have they always been CIs?
Sussex has a CI as the WATTO and Middlesex has a CI as the H&S Officer
One used to be a VRT (about one year) before stepping out of uniform due to work, became a CI straight away and then six months later took up the post. The other two have always been CIs. One for donkeys years, the other around 4 years.
All three have specific knowledge, otherwise they wouldn’t have applied to do the jobs. They were in competition with SNCOs and VRTs in most scenarios.
Ssomeone decided that there was a “need” & associated value for the CI Convention. So far, so good - especially for those who could attend.
However, in the aftermath, zero feedback from HQAC is a very poor state of affairs. No discussion notes or copies of presentations/handouts & nothing looking at points raised, way forward, proposals for improvements., etc.
Perfect way to alienate a significant group of CFAVs…
1 Like
Yes indeed, not giving any feedback at all strikes me as most unprofessional and a sure fire way of ‘uninvolving’ (good word that!) non uniformed staff.
1 Like
Nailed it.
Not everyone wants to end up eating caviar and licking silver spoons in the Mess you know.