RIAT camp back in the 90s had what we’d call WExO today as Camp Com run by B&G Wing…
It grew a litter each year and so neighbouring wing’s and neighbouring eingsbto neighbouring wings were invited until it got big enough HQAC took notice and felt they should take control.
Im not saying it waa free to the public purse 30 years ago but i am saying HQAC getting involved hasn’t always made improvements in all elements.
Was JL a national event on start up or did that start as a Wing/Region event that HQAC built upon and expanded?
Pretty sure the Government had an academic survey done which explained in layman’s terms what we did and what the benefits were.
If it’s important you fund it, if it isn’t you don’t. We threw money at CEP to increase the number of Cadets so I don’t really see how cutting the legs out from under the existing community units helps meet government policy.
Perhaps those weary people who criticise volunteers for wanting a minimal recognition of the time and effort they expend should question how much it would cost of the Government had to pay the real cost for what they get.
Why does a discussion around reducing VA leading to lower levels of activity and feelings of being less or under valued have to be reduced to accusations of “doing it for the money”?
There is only so much time and effort that can be spent, and the quantity of VA (either per day or total days) can tip the balance one way or another into what is manageable or palatable.
How many around the organisation would (seriously consider the option to) trade in their job for the ability to run cadet or similar youth activities full time? They don’t because it’s not financially viable, but does that mean they’re “in it for the money” during the smaller amount of time they do give?
Is someone with over 90% attendance at two nights a week “in it for the money” when they claim their 28 days on top of what they do for free?
The organisation isn’t only funded with public money. Besides, although you suggest “a small number” benefit, where public money is concerned the benefit to society is counted separately and from the independent report we know that there is indeed a benefit longer term to society as a result of the benefits that that “small number” reap in the short.
By the same argument you could suggest that we shouldn’t fund schools because only pupils benefit. It’s an equally narrow assessment that is completely blind to the broader effect.
I don’t “do it for the money” but I’m unable to take part in many off-squadron activities without it. The mileage paid only just about covers the fuel, not any wear & tear, and I use my car for cadet activities more than anything else - so why shouldn’t wear & tear be covered?
Additionally, unlike a few people I know, the org I work for doesn’t have an Armed Forces Policy and therefore there’s zero chance of me getting paid time off to cover (for example) a wing camp. That means VA for those weeks pays my household bills.
So put bluntly, if VA disappears then I have no choice but to do the same. And if you want to view that as “being in it for the money” then you’re not the sharpest knife in the drawer.
Maybe you’re one of the lucky ones who can walk everywhere they need to go with RAFAC and who gets additional paid time off for cadet duties, but don’t make the mistake of thinking everyone is in the same boat as you.
the belief that the “money” is “worth it” is also quite ignorant. it is pocket money for many, a day’s pay enough to treat the family to a meal out or possibly a night away, some may choose to use it to subsidised thier personal kit required to take part, or to suppliment other hobbies they may have, at best it helps those less comfortable to keep their head above water
to suggest people are “in it for the money” as if the money makes a “significant” difference (ie additional salary) is getting a higher rate of and much more VA than I know of being possible!
this is a “typical” tradesman rate and is inline with what I have experienced having had a new kitchen, two bathrooms and new intertior doors fitted - even more so with the doors as we supplied them ourselves just got the carpenter to fit them, his bill was equavalent to £100/day
I’m currently on a permanent contract in the charity sector, and would describe my salary as being close to the national median. As a Fg Off, my VA is less than a day’s equivalent salary, especially as it’s taxed as a secondary salary at the basic rate.
If I was contracting (which has much less job security attached to it and is why I don’t do it) my current VA would be in the range of 4-5x less than my day rate. It’d be a contradictory positions where I’d lose a lot more money by volunteering, but be in a better position to be able to afford to volunteer more time.
Cutting VA, in my opinion, will harm the diversity of volunteers on non-squadron activities and thus dilute the cadet experience, as only those who could afford to volunteer without VA anyhow will be present.
I have always thought this would be the biggest impact and now I’m working with another volunteer organisation where there is no pay at all I can certainly see the trend. It would be a bad thing for the RAFAC if we lost some of our diversity among the volunteers, our strength in teams often comes from the variety of different lives we lead.
If you quoted my terms of business then I’m at £250 per hour (not that I often use that figure or see most of it when I do) so VA per day would cover about half an hour…