It is going to be a Queen’s Commission, according to what’s been written above.
Eh?
RC North has asked everyone to complete a surveymonkey to gain an insight into alternative pins/ no pins at all. VR(T) pins weren’t one of the options though.
In addition there is also an email address - cadetforcescommission@ - for respondents to give their comments, concerns and suggestions.
Just a couple of thoughts
-
Will CFC ranks all be substantive or will they retain a maximum substantive rank and acting ranks thereafter, similar to VR(T)? Personally, I can’t see any reason why they should cap substantive ranks with the introduction of this commission but…
-
Will ranks retain the same level of VA as currently or will we be expected to go onto a revised (lower?) pay structure?
-
Will the CFC retain traditional RAF ranks or will they adopt the ranks initially mooted in 1918?: [I]Ensign, Lieutenant, Flight Leader, Squadron Leader, Reeve, Banneret, Fourth Ardian, Third Ardian, Second Ardian, Ardian and Air Marshal[/I].
-
Will there be a change in insignia? If so, that’s an [I]awful[/I] lot of money to paid out for re-ranking of No.1’s…
Just curious.
As with all changes of the nature it is the law of unintended consequences which makes me nervous of things like this.
A big change to our commissions could have huge repercussions in the future unforeseen and unintended.
Reading the e-mail from OC(N) it confirms that we are getting a new commission but will I as a VR(T) have to resign and reenlist, automatic transfer or carry on as before as VR(T). Nobody knows or nobody is telling.
I have a commission from the queen in the VR ( not the VR(T)) can it be removed without my permission?
Of course it can, either by court martial or by not extending at renewal.
Courts marshal yes but if I have been a good little boy and I have been commissioned long enough as a Flt Lt I will for the rest of my days be a Flt Lt in the VR(T) Retd
I ticked other and put VRT
I put flying pig…
VRT are only substantive Fg Off so therefore do not retain rank on retirement - occasional exceptional case in the past i believe
For those that are in the last stages of commission and who have applied through various forms for VRT surely they will be appointed VRT until what time and those applying for commission after April will be applying for CF commission
Does this mean we will still be in 22 group as we have nothing to with RAF anymore? 
I voted no insignia…if the RAF got rid of the Aux Pins, so should ours. Royal Air Force Air Cadets Adult Volunteer that will be fun to try and fit on a lapel! 
1 Like
will the new CF commission still come under QRs or SD (service disipline) when on duty?
if it keeps the RAF Rank structure there needs to be a donotation between regular officer and cadet officer so they can be picked apart
No - they will become separate to QRs/SRs
No - there isn’t a requirement to distinguish. They will tell you and the ID card already does that. What would you do when they are dressed in civilian clothes whilst on duty?
I have to agree with Prune here. If there’s no requirement for regulars and auxiliaries to be identified as separate forces, then why should CF’s need an identifier just because they might wear traditional RAF rank badges?
What happened to the mantra of ‘One Air Force, indivisible and [I]indistinguishable[/I]’?
2 Likes
so if they are seperate to QR’s and SD… then i can see many aproblem caused there,
in regards to distinguishing rank, sadly i have to say ive had one to many cadet officers in my time try to overstep their mark and also be in places they shouldnt be,l. but since the RAF has now put in place an overt ID policy maybe it will be easier… but i place the question again… if you no longer have an RAF commission and now a cadet forces outside of QRs and SD, then cadet officers will now have ZERO authority over servicemen compared to their limited powers before so should be easily identifiable since you wont be RAFVRT anymore
Why? You are right about authority, but anyone tipping up to a section asking for stuff is always going to be asked where they are from. You don’t just sign over the keys to a Typhoon to anyone do you?
(Wait, just spotted your icon. Maybe you do! Typical Plod getting all flustered over ID badges).
I suppose it’s one of those odd situations - similar to why RAFP wear stab vests in the naafi. How many officers have been injured with bladed articles over the last 10 years?
One question that does not seem to have been addressed is into what organisation will we be commissioned? Currently, this is the RAFVR, an established reserve air force and thus a part of the armed forces. If a separate organisation (“Cadet Forces”?) is established outside the armed services, the question becomes one of the legal basis for the RAF to appoint personnel to run what is an independent corporate entity, established by Royal Warrant, and to issue orders to volunteer staff of that organisation.
We are not commissioned in the VR to give us authority over others. We are commissioned in the VR to give others authority over us. Having accepted the VR commission, we accept the authority of the RAF and Officers appointed over us, as set out in QRs for the RAF and regulations made, by the RAF, under the terms of the Warrant.
A commission from the Queen does not constitute an appointment within the armed services. If we are not members of the armed forces, then the previous rules (AFA + QRs) don’t apply and the basis for acceptability changes from a military to a civilian benchmark.
For example, the RAF is able to impose certain requirements on the grounds of “military necessity”, for example, regulations regarding tattoos or beards. If I want to grow a beard, I can’t, unless for health or religious reasons. In the civilian world this could be classified as discrimination on the grounds of belief, race or religion, hence unlawful
The law of unintended consequences dictates that at some point the legality of various rules and regulations will be tested, and it seems likely that common law principles will preclude subjecting civilians to military authority. Certainly an extensive review of the regulations will need to be conducted.
Further, a wider gap between the ATC and the dead hand of RAF bureaucracy has much to commend it. Whilst I thoroughly appreciate the massive support of the RAF over the years, I have to ask, are we truly better off with expensive and widely spaced VGS and AEF, when we might instead use the money to contract with local flying or gliding schools to provide equivalent services? Is access to “white fleet” preferable to use of community minibuses or local vehicle hire? Do we really need “military” shooting qualifications, regulations for transport of arms or ammunition, etc, etc?
This would, however, require a true strategic review of options for the future development of the ATC (turkeys to vote for Christmas…), with a presumption that the running of the organisation by the RAF is a means and not an end, and not necessarily the best means.
The ADCC was a civilian conscripted to support the war effort in 1941 as the ATC. Perhaps it is time to be “demobbed” and returned to civvy street.